ELG: Speaking
Criteria for the Speaking early learning goal (ELG)
As set out in the early years foundation stage statutory framework, children at the expected level of development for the Speaking ELG will:
- participate in small group, class and one-to-one discussions, offering their own ideas, using recently introduced vocabulary
- offer explanations for why things might happen, making use of recently introduced vocabulary from stories, non-fiction, rhymes and poems when appropriate
- express their ideas and feelings about their experiences using full sentences, including use of past, present and future tenses and making use of conjunctions, with modelling and support from their teacher
Key messages
The Speaking ELG:
- looks at whether a child can communicate effectively, offering and expressing their ideas and explanations clearly
- can be assessed in both English and British Sign Language (BSL)
- is foundational in enabling success across other ELGs
When you make judgements on the Speaking ELG, remember:
- children can meet the ELG even with minor grammatical errors, such saying ‘I drawed a picture’ instead of ‘I drew a picture’
- children can meet the ELG even with minor speech immaturities (on sounds like r, th and consonant clusters like sp and fr) – what’s important is that their speech can be understood
- you should use a range of evidence and different scenarios when assessing the ELG, including spontaneous conversations and role play
- children can meet the criteria through discussions with both adults and peers
This video illustrates examples of assessment practice. While it features real children in real school settings, their actual developmental levels may differ from what is shown, and some scenes include acting for demonstration purposes.
Case studies
Jacob is working at the expected level
This judgement draws on observations in whole-class, small-group and independent play, plus information from parents, carers and wraparound staff. In class, Jacob speaks confidently, offering relevant ideas and explanations using age-appropriate vocabulary. In discussions linked to stories and non-fiction, he contributes clear reasons (“because…”, “so…”, “if…”) and can justify his thinking when questioned. He generally uses full sentences and connects ideas with common conjunctions. His speech is audible and expressive, and minor grammatical slips do not impede meaning.
Parents and wraparound staff report that Jacob shows consistent behaviours across contexts: he describes past events, explains preferences, asks and answers questions, and interacts confidently with unfamiliar adults and peers in structured and unstructured activities. Considering the whole picture, he consistently demonstrates the core elements of the Speaking ELG – participating in varied discussions, making explanations using recently taught vocabulary, and expressing ideas in full sentences with age-appropriate grammatical control (normal, minor errors). On a best-fit basis, the teacher judges that Jacob is at the expected level for the Speaking ELG.
Elena is working at the expected level
This judgement uses evidence from school and home. In school, Elena communicates reliably using gestures, facial expressions and other non‑verbal signals, and she follows routines and instructions. She rarely speaks in whole‑class situations and does not routinely use spoken English with adults. However, she whispers to a small number of trusted peers, using full sentences, initiating and responding appropriately in short exchanges during play. These interactions show that when she feels confident, she can use short sentences to negotiate and share ideas.
Parents report that at home she speaks confidently and fluently in full sentences, retells events and explains her thinking. Teachers also note brief glimpses of this at drop off and collection time. Taken together over time and across contexts, the evidence shows she can meet the Speaking ELG criteria independently. The school‑based presentation reflects a contextual barrier rather than a developmental delay.
Using best‑fit judgement against the ELG descriptors — participation in discussions, offering explanations using recently taught vocabulary, and expressing ideas in full sentences with appropriate grammatical features — the teacher judges Elena as at the expected level for the Speaking ELG. For Elena, it is vital that this context is shared with the year 1 teacher, so they can understand why she was assessed as expected.
Callum is working at an emerging level
This judgement draws on school observations and parental information about home‑language use. Callum is learning English as an additional language and currently has limited vocabulary in English. In school, he mainly communicates through gestures, facial expressions and single words or short phrases. He follows instructions and routines and joins shared activities using non‑verbal signals and emerging vocabulary.
Parents report that his home‑language speech is better. In unfamiliar social situations, he also uses single words or short phrases, but in others he uses full sentences and has meaningful conversations. In class, he attempts new vocabulary in songs and shared stories and is beginning to respond to simple questions with support. However, he does not yet use full sentences consistently, sustain back‑and‑forth exchanges, or explain ideas independently. As the Communication and Language ELGs (including Speaking) must be judged in English or BSL, the current evidence does not meet the Speaking ELG descriptors. On a best‑fit basis, the teacher judges Callum as working at an emerging level, while recognising positive progress and the likelihood of further gains as his English develops.
George is working at an emerging level
This judgement is based on observations in school and information from parents and key adults. In school, George typically uses short two‑ or three‑word phrases rather than full sentences. He does not yet sustain back‑and‑forth conversation with adults or peers and is not able to explain ideas or reasoning. When prompted, he may attempt to contribute, but he finds it difficult to extend utterances or respond to follow‑up questions appropriately, and his participation in group talk is limited.
Across the observation period, these patterns are consistent. While staff provide opportunities for discussion in varied contexts (play, routines, guided activities), he does not yet demonstrate the level of independent, sentence‑level expression or the explanatory language using recently taught vocabulary described in the Speaking ELG. Because of this, professional judgement currently indicates he is working at an emerging level. Next steps, shared with the year 1 teacher, focus on expanding phrase length towards full sentences, modelling conjunctions during meaningful activities, developing his vocabulary and increasing supported opportunities for turn‑taking and explanation over time.