Scottish Study of Early Learning and Childcare: Phase 5 Report

Characteristics of ELC

To gather information on the characteristics of sampled ELC settings, inspectors from the Care Inspectorate (acting as observers independent of their regulatory roles) conducted observations of 150 settings using the most recent version of the Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale (ECERS-3).

ECERS-3 was used for a number of reasons including that it centres on the experience of the child in the setting, and it is relatively easy to administer given that only one three-hour observation is required. The tool can also be used to determine if particular setting characteristics contribute to differential outcomes in children.

It is important to note that these tools are not the only method of assessing setting quality in Scotland. Indeed, the Care Inspectorate ratings provide a broader measure of the quality of practice and policy within settings that have also been found to be related to children's outcomes in Scotland. Further, all ELC providers are required to demonstrate that they meet the National Standard for ELC Providers before they can access funding to deliver the funded ELC hours, whether they are in the public, private or voluntary sectors. Care Inspectorate ratings form key quality criteria within the National Standard. Local authorities are responsible for assessing and monitoring compliance with the National Standard.

As with the Care Inspectorate inspection methodology, the setting observations focussed on outcomes. However, the methodology differed in that the ECERS-3 tool was used to observe for three hours, with no consultation with setting staff and no professional dialogue or explicit feedback provided. This was because the observations were intended to be a snapshot to inform the study and control for variation in child outcome data, rather than serving as an assessment of an individual setting's quality. During the ECERS-3 observations, observers looked at the six domains of the scale specifically for four- and five-year-olds. In contrast, during a formal inspection, Care Inspectorate inspectors consider a range of areas that impact on experiences for all children attending the setting, not just those in specific age groups. The key areas covered during a formal inspection are likely to include some or all of the domain areas but can also cover other aspects of the provision to evaluate the overall quality of the setting.

The ECERS-3 scale comprises 35 items across 6 different subscales: space and furnishings; personal care routines; language and literacy; learning activities; interaction and programme structure. More details of the scale are included in Appendix C.

Background data on settings collected during observation

In addition to the main indicators, background data was collected during observations on the structure of the setting. This included: the number of children and staff present at the time of observation; whether there was access to outdoor space; and whether there was free-flow access to outdoor space on the day of the observation.^[25] Out of all settings that were observed, 71% were local authority settings and 29% were funder provider settings.

The majority of settings (57%) had between 21 and 50 four-and five-year-olds present in the setting on the day of the observation. Funder provider settings tended to be smaller, with 67% having 20 or fewer four- and five-year-olds present, compared with 25% of local authority settings. Six percent of settings had more than 50 present. Almost all settings had access to outdoor space (99%) and free flow access was observed in 79% of settings.

ECERS data on ELC settings

Table 7.1 summarises scores on each of the ECERS subscales from 1 to 7: 1 (inadequate), 3 (minimal), 5 (good), and 7 (excellent). Settings scored highest on the Interaction subscale, with 87% of settings scoring 5 or above. Most settings also scored highly in Personal Care Routines (77%), Programme Structure (75%) and Space and Furnishings (64%). It should be noted however, with a maximum possible score of 7 on each item, an average score of 5 indicates room for improvement on multiple items within the scale. On the Learning Activities subscale, no settings scored the maximum 7. Of the other scales, the highest proportion achieving the maximum – indicating 'excellent' on all items – was 29% for Programme Structure.

Base: All settings observed (Phase 5, unweighted)

Note: Settings' mean score for each subscale was categorised based on the highest score fully achieved e.g. if a setting scored 4.5 for the Space and Furnishings subscale, they would be categorised as '4 < 5' rather than rounding up to 5. This decision was made in consultation with academic colleagues and the Care Inspectorate.

Scores were weakest on the Learning Activities scale, with only 14% of settings scoring 5 or above and 38% scoring below 3. Meanwhile, just under four in ten (38%) of the settings scored 5 or above for Language and Literacy.