Not to send my child to reception year?

Because most 4-5 yos are in school, there aren't many around to socialise with. They're not in the nurseries or at day time groups.

Missing yR is an educational and social disadvantage.

There'll be little choice of school places in y1 and being a late joiner can be difficult to blend in socially, particularly if friendships are lead heavily by parental friendships out of school.

I don't think 'play' should be seen as a negative term!

If children in reception are doing 'formal learning,' they shouldn't be. Play is hugely important.

It's so sad when all of this is reduced to 'maths and phonics,' or when teachers are too limited to cope with children who join school later, or who are less able. I really think this is a lot of what is wrong with schooling today. We need more play, and less ticking of boxes and telling children and parents they will be irrevocably damaged by any step outside of a box.

The problem is that we can only tell you about what happens in reception in this country-you need either to say what country you're in to find out if anyone on here has experience that will help, or talk to people around you....

Reception is mostly play based. I wouldn’t want to start my DC in year 1 as everyone will of made friends and they won’t be used to the routine etc.

Most school days are around the hours 9-3:30. If your child is in full time nursery why would you consider not sending them to school? Would they stay in a private nursery? I definitely think it would be better for them to go to school.

Everyone has pointed out that it's rare for children not to do reception, and so of course that has its own effect.

I adore my DD's school and they were wonderful - and not too silly about being hidebound by targets - but even there, it was a bit sad to see the focus on 'work' for children who were too young. I do think you have a real worry here.

I have friends and family not from the UK who are shocked at how prescriptive education is here, and how counter-productive it often is.

If possible, I would look hard for a school that seems sensible, but I would send a reception-age child to school, just because it makes them such an outsider otherwise.

And of course children who miss reception year catch up. It's such a short time in their school lives. Obviously the vast majority of kids benefit from that year, it doesn't sound like you are talking about a child with SEN.

If your child is summer born (1st April to the end of August) then you can delay their start until compulsory school age.

We're doing that for both of our summer born boys.

I would never choose to outright miss the reception year though. The jump from Reception to Y1 is pretty big.

I'm glad you posted this!

Reception is incredibly important in my opinion.

It's mostly about playing and socialising- they will make friends and so will you ( well acquaintances anyway!)

If you don't enrol for reception, class size limits may mean you can't get a place at the school you want for year 1.

Reception is play based. Why miss that?

I would start in reception. You make friends. And so do your kids. X. It's all just play. It's fun.

I wo

@CelesteCunningham yes that's what I'm getting at. The foundation phase in Wales does differ a bit.
----'
I didn't Skip reception for my summer born kids for all the reasons given. I did opt out of school nursery for the youngest so she was already at a slight disadvantage compared to peers.

I completely agree with @neverbeenskiing

Have a look at the Early Learning Goals for Reception children: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/65253bc12548ca000dddf050/EYFSP20244_handbook.pdf
(Page 24 onwards)

Yes the curriculum is play-based, but the crucial foundation of learning that they need for Year 1 is in there. A child who skips Reception will be at an academic and social disadvantage.

I work in a school. So many people think all Reception children do is "play" but that's partly because Reception teachers are so skilled the kids don't even realise they're doing formal learning, but they absolutely are. They just have a lot of fun while they're doing it. I've always said that Reception is the hardest year group in primary to teach for this reason.

The majority of Reception children in my school who started in September are writing sentences now. They are all reading words, and some are moving onto trickier reading books with longer words. When we invite parents in for live Maths sessions they are surprised at how much content has been covered.

But it's not just about academic work. Our Reception children have been to the theatre, a working farm, done world music and art workshops, bike and road safety sessions, learned about how to take care of their minds and bodies and what makes a good friend. They have had the chance to talk about their hobbies and interests in assemblies and performed in concerts. It's lovely to see them develop their confidence as they progress through their Reception year. They're generally very settled and comfortable with the environment and staff by the time we start thinking about transition to Year 1.

Any child who joined in Year 1 would be at a significant disadvantage to their classmates, particularly in Maths and Phonics but also socially. Not that they would be likely to get a place in Year 1 in our school anyway, which I imagine would be the case in many schools.

I don't see why you wouldn't send them. I sent mine.

If your child is already in FT nursery, send them to school. Honestly, it's basically the same with maybe a tiny bit more structure and a shorter day. My eldest was in full time 9-5 nursery before she started reception. She was bouncing off the walls still with energy by 3pm because it was such a short day and easier on her than nursery was. And even better, it was completely free! And she was making friends who would remain long term friends for many years.

If COVID home schooling taught us anything, it's that the vast majority of us are not better off teaching our children at home.

I have a summer born DS and he started Reception with his peers but only did 1/2 days for the first two terms. It was not popular with the school, but he was still napping in the afternoons and I was fortunate enough to have my parents to look after him in the afternoons. Mum supported him with his reading and phonics play and he was never behind with anything. He’s now on track for 7-9 in his GCSEs so it didn’t do him any harm.

This.

In the school that my kids went to there were not even any desks in reception - just tables with different activities on. And yet both my kids came out of it able to read and write fluently. How?!?

I strongly suspect that they sprinkle fairy dust on them and perform magic spells.

Presumably if she's talking about Reception. Unless Wales also calls it that?

Are you in England?
This will influence responses

Both DC started in Reception, DS is late August born and was youngest in the year, but both had an awesome time. Reception is fun and they make lots of friends. There was learning of course, but it's low pressure and I think both would have been at a huge disadvantage if they'd skipped it.

DS is a very late August baby. He joined reception just days after he turned 4 and it's the best decision I made. He is in year 1 now and in the highest level reading group, recently for 40/40 on his phonics check, is so sociable and loves school. I honestly think if I would have deferred his school place he would be no where near where he is now.

And actually, another thing to consider, places at all the decent schools go like hot cakes for Reception so it's a challenge to get an in year space, or year 1 space.

I wondered about this because I have a July baby and just kept hearing it's "play based" but I am absolutely amazed by how much they learnt. It's like a full year. I have no idea how kids who don't do it would ever catch up.

The school day is 9ish to 3pm ish.