When I left my previous career to work in early childhood education, it felt like a leap of faith.
I wasn’t fresh out of school — I already held two master’s degrees (though not in education), and I had some hands-on experience volunteering in a preschool. But I knew that to truly make early education my profession, I needed proper training.
In California, that path was clear. One recognised route. One set of accredited courses. Within months, I was in training and my employer knew exactly where I stood. Together we could discuss my career path.
That clarity made it easier to take the leap.
I’ve often wondered: would I have taken that leap if I’d been in England?
A system that confuses more than it clarifies
In England, entering the early years workforce — or progressing within it — can be bewildering. As the Nutbrown Review (2012) famously found, there were at the time over 400 different qualifications in use across the sector. Some led to Level 3 status, some didn’t. Some were recognised by employers, some weren’t. Few had a clear progression route to anything else.
In the years since, to be fair, there have been reforms. Government reviews, new training routes, changes to Level 3 and Level 6 qualifications, the development of T-levels and Early Years Educator standards. Each with good intentions. But taken together, they haven’t always helped.
Instead of building a streamlined, professional system, we’ve created a patchwork — new qualifications layered over old ones, constant updates to what “counts,” and no long-term clarity about how credentials stack up, connect, or progress.
Why this isn’t just a bureaucratic problem
This may sound like a technical issue, but it’s actually a deeply professional one.
A confusing qualification system:
- Discourages talented people from entering or staying in the workforce
- Makes it hard for employers to recognise and compare training
- Creates fragmentation, undermines trust, and weakens shared standards
- Limits career progression and professional identity
And when there’s no clear career structure, there’s little incentive — or even possibility — to invest in long-term growth. In fields like teaching, nursing, or social work, qualification routes are standardised and respected. In early education, they’re fractured and ambiguous.
Children need consistency — so do educators
If we want early education to be taken seriously, we need to treat the workforce seriously. That includes pay, yes — but it also includes a qualification system that’s clear, coherent, and worthy of the work it supports.
One that makes it easier to enter the profession, easier to grow within it, and easier for all of us to know what we’re building toward.
Just like young children thrive on certainty, stability, and structure — so do early years educators.
Let’s give them that foundation.
Sara Bonetti Research 