Keir Starmer "sick and tired" of hearing about children who aren't school-ready

And before anyone jumps at me for saying that, I had a brilliant track record of identifying the children coming up from Reception who were undiagnosed, versus those who needed boundaries. Some of these children from either category, especially at 5 and 6, often present in the same way.
I fully accept many teachers get it wrong and want to blame parents rather than consider SEN, especially with quiet non-disruptive children.
But some of us do know what we are doing and there are more and more children who present as having additional needs, but actually what they need is a secure relationship with an adult who is clearly in charge of the environment, and has firm boundaries.

He's actually complimenting her if you'd like to climb down off your high horse. He's saying that despite how she feels about herself and how she thinks others might see her, that she comes across really well.

I think you’re right. More and more parents are delegating their responsibilities to schools.

I mean, if you did a broad survey you would find working class people cannot spell as well as middle class people. And probably that middle class people don’t have as wide a vocabulary as upper class people. And so on. Not because you’re thicker the poorer you are, or because your parents did a certain job, but because money is nearly always used to buy education. This isn’t remotely controversial.

A person who writes an eloquent post with correct spelling probably speaks similarly in real life, and as such I don’t think people will listen and judge based on assumptions about education.

We've debated this to death on here and I think most people are in agreement with him.

The consensus here has always seemed to be that unless a child has a specific medical or SEN issue, they should not be starting school in nappies - because that's the crux of it, right? Staff being told they must change nappies?

It didn't used to happen but now it's happening more and more. Whether we like it or not, most cases are not due to anything but parents not preparing kids for school.

I am visibly working class. My style is definitely more Towie than Made in Chelsea!
I am also well educated and have a decent professional job. I did have my kids young and was judged for it, which is perhaps why I am particularly sensitive to the previous comment.
I remember being fully aware that when out and about, in my casual clothes, with my young children, many people assumed I was thick. We also have a nice car out the front so maybe the neighbours think we are drug dealers.
Judge me all you want for having children young and making different life choices, but please don’t assume I am illiterate or uneducated because I am working class.

Regarding children coming to school without the basic skills, as an ex-teacher, I wholeheartedly agree with this. We have the kids from neglected families who are sat on screens all day, and then we have the kids who have been ‘gentle parented’. They are equally problematic but I have found more success with the lazy parents than the other ones.

The poorer parents may not have had a great time at school themselves so some are hostile towards our suggestions of help, others are extremely grateful as they want the best for their children and are delighted to be shown how to do that. Those who proudly ‘gentle parent’, well, there’s not much we can do about those as they’ve made a conscious decision to ensure their children are the centre of the universe. These tend to be the ones who are desperate for the SEN label rather than admit they might need to look at their parenting.

I'm not convinced that back in my day, 80's, all kids were toilet trained then either. There were a few kids who would wet themselves in junior school and the odd poo-y pants incident. It's seared into my brain.

I don't remember back far enough for infant school.

Your specific circumstances aren't what Kier Starmer is referring to, so try not to take it personally. He's talking generally, not specifically about you.

I haven't heard first hand what he said but perhaps he could have shown empathy even if he does need to get the difficult message out there, by caveating it with "I recognise there are many challenging family stories, but we need many more children to be school-ready". Starmer is a father, he isn't a completely heartless person, but he does need to tackle some of these challenging national issues headlong, even if it makes him unpopular.

And who were children in lockdown with for months and months? Their parents, mostly. Parents who should have potty-trained them, taught them how to wash their hands, brush their teeth, tie laces, basic language skills and a little reading. Why do people have children if they can't be bothered to even try doing these things? NT children should be able to learn these things if their parents put in the effort with them. Parents' responsibilities shouldn't be abdicated to teachers.

but if there is nothing “wrong” with them they won’t get a diagnosis. They’ll simply wait 8 years on the waiting list to be told all is fine.

unless you’re indicating medical professional misdiagnose or find every child put in front of them to be ND?

I too find it very hard to believe that children routinely enter secondary school, not toilet trained.

I agree with most of what you have said, articulately the support and the closure of Sure Starts.

Maybe an unpopular opinion so I'll prepare myself for the attacks coming this way....there seems to be a massive increase in the demand for assessments, referrals etc. It's incredibly hard when a family is trying to get support for their child who desperately needs it. But the situation is not being helped by the parents jumping on a bandwagon and pushing for a diagnosis so that they can get a benefits top up. Also, naughty kids and bad parents do exist. The child doesn't always need a diagnosis, they might just need a good role model and/or firmer parents who are better at parenting.

Haven’t rtft yet but we have children in years 1&2, even 3, who still can’t sit and listen, who can’t contribute ideas or conversation outside of whatever the latest trend on YouTube or Roblox is, who can’t share, who struggle to sit at the table at lunchtime and who don’t respect adults in school or their own peers.
These are children with no obvious need (and no issues at home reported by parents as I know masking can be an issue in school)
Tbh it’s fairly obvious just by looking at the parents at pick up, some of them don’t even greet their children or are chatting away on their phones.

most well parented, NT, summer born children might find reception a bit tricky, teachers will allow for that, and they usually catch up with their peers by the end of the infants (I’m a summer born myself).

I’m more concerned about prime ministers starting the job who clearly aren’t PM ready !

If summer born June-August children are school ready, then the older children have no excuse unless they have disabilities. Depends on how premature too eg 36-37 weeks isn’t that premature compared to those who need a longer stay in hospital.

In France the maternelle (nursery school) system is designed to get children ready for primary school, which starts at 6, not 5. Maternelle is not compulsory but it's free and 90+% of French kids go to it starting from 3, or 2½ in some places.

BBC radio did a very good documentary on it a while back. The head teacher explained that their aim was "In year 1, the children learn to master the shoulders; in year 2, their elbows; and in year 3, their wrists. Then they're ready to learn to write in the first weeks of primary". It's more complicated than that, of course, but the point is the acquisition of successively more subtle motor and other social/personal skills, exactly as you have listed here. French primary teachers are paid to teach and definitely not to attend to basic social skills or toilet training.

The last reception class I taught (27 kids) had 3 in nappies and two constant wetters. That was 2 years ago.

There is an argument that the reason toilet training takes more time now is because the current nappies are so good. The children don’t feel the dampness.

Nurseries can’t give the 1-2-1 attention consistently.

Who was looking after you if they were working?

That's surely not normal.

Not least because toilet access at DC secondary was not really there - (and yes girls did trurtant during periods) and nieces school in another part of UK was similar. They locked toilet and heavily resticted access to point it often wasn't there in practise.

They did in both cases have toilet passes but getting one was involved GP and hospitals and then actaully managing to get right staff member to unlock - and yes many cmplained and schools insisted it wasn't as restrictive as kids found it.

At 4, nearly 5 years of age, that's more than enough time to potty train a child. Working or otherwise.

I agree that's the approach we had - they could do things but needed more support and time (so many times started earlier) but I didn't find this understanding.

I tended to find the home support often dismissed - concerns dismissed often told they weren't bad enough for support - frustraion they struggled or were behind with things like coordination despite best efforts - and when big problem were hit told the extra home support had masked the issues ie your at fault there as well.

Dmum was frankly taken aback at attitude schools had towards her GC in early years towards occaional toilet accidents- she said it was more expected when we were young- expect we were all trained but that occaional accidents happened and were just dealt with - she volunteered and worked as dinner lady in schools so saw more than most.

I just worry this will be turned on all parents - even when it later much clearer that the child is ND or has SEN and very likely the parents have been trying to get near disgonsis/services for bloody years.

I can believe this - DS is in year 5 and says some of the boys he knows don’t wash their hands after using the bathroom. He sees them.

One of his school friends is met by his mother every day with a bottle of full sugar Coke. The poor child is fat

TBH, OP you sound as if you have a bit of a chip on your shoulder. He wasn't referring to children who have additional needs but, as others have said, children who haven't been toilet trained etc due to poor parenting.

@Bedtelly I'd say potty trained for starters. Able to be a little more independent of mom and dad. Using cutlery. Sitting still for short periods. Following instructions. Knowing that they have to listen to the adult, both to learn and for their own safety. Able to dress themselves, or with very little support to do this. Put their own shoes on (velcro fasteners are ideal). The fact that you are asking this question tells me you are doing a good job.

We have children still in nappies because mom thinks they're not ready for big boy pants (so it's ok for school staff to clean up poo bums because mom WON'T potty train. Yes, we have a mom who won't!) Kids who get up and run off when they're told to sit with the class on the carpet. Kids who kick and bite when they're stopped from running along the corridor out of the classroom. Chew toys are becoming a fashion/coping mechanism. We have 5 year olds telling teachers to eff off. And I'm not talking of ND children. I'm talking of children who have come to school having not been parented, not been corrected, never been told the word 'no', have no idea how to interact with others, don't know the meaning of kindness, haven't been taught to use good manners. Parents who have put their kids in front of a tablet, very little interaction, don't read a book to them.