To think nursery age children don't need to be "school ready"

[adsy]

Beyond being toilet trained, able to put on shoes/coats and recognising very simple numbers and shapes.
Head of OFSTED says that nurseries and childminders are failing children as they are not getting them school ready. he thinks there should be more structured learning for 2 and 3 year olds.
I am a childminder and see my role at that age is to ensure children can sit attentively for a few minutes, can use a knife and fork etc.
As it happens, I do also make sure I do lots of reading/ number games/ colour recognition etc. but I disagree that this should be in a structured environment as he suggests.
He says the good nurseries are those attached to schools, dismissing the thousands of excellent nurseries and childminders around the country.
I think that children already start school very young and if they only start to learn simple arithmetic at 4 yo, then so be it.
2 and 3 yos should be learning through play, the word structured fills me with dread in relation to what are essentially toddlers.

No capsium. Our school is in a village so the number of nurseries where the children come from is small.

The children who come from one nursey are consistently, year after year, not as school ready as those who come from the other 2 nurseries.

The fact is, one nursery is not as good as the other two.

Really I totally agree.

A relaxed home environment with children being taken to a highly qualified more educational setting a few hours a week.

The childminder can focus on a creating a home environment and the pre-school can employ degree educated staff.

I am asking again, if Sir Michael Wilshaw could please enlighten us with the following statistics (I'm sure they are not hard to find), how many children who are not 'school ready'

• come from the care system or are under the supervision of a social worker;
• come from families living below the poverty line;
• come families where one or both parents have substence abuse issues;
• are from families that have recently arrived in this country as refugees and come from countries affected by conflict, or with parents who have recently arrived in this country as migrants and have English as a second language;
• have been diagnosed with a learning difficulty, disability, or indeed will be diagnosed later on (in many cases - if not most - children on the autistic spectrum, or with any form of dyspraxia either physical or verbal - are not diagnosed by the age of 4).

And how many of the children who are not 'ready for school' have attended registered childminding settings and/or commercial nurseries.

In terms of speech development, my absolute pet hate when it comes to children being 'not ready for school', NHS speech therapy services have been cut to an absolute minimum. Waiting lists are up to 6 months in some areas, and most areas will provide no support from professional speech therapists before the child is aged 3. In the past, speech therapists would have the staff/budget to visit schools to identify children with speech difficulties and provide therapy within the school. THis doesn't happen anymore, as speech therapy services have no budget or resources to provide quality services, especially within the early years.

YABU - your post makes me glad i chose a nursery over a CM. It's all about learning through play - mark making rather than writing, counting games rather than learning numbers, - the year before reception children do need this or school is going to be a shock. It's about more focussed group things NOT about getting them to learn by rote.
they're talking about the nurseries & CM's that don't do enough of this.
the whole point of the free nursery hours is supposed to be to get kids ready for a school environment.

Forago I totally agree.

I have a G&T coding 10 year old.

He had buggar all screen time at 3.

I think the problem is no matter how many laws, how much legislation is passed and whatever OFSTED would like to happen every child will learn at their own pace. I actually think to treat children as the same, I.e. A 2 year old boy is not the same as a 2 year old girl and until they recognise this basic fact they will keep getting it wrong.

As someone upthread pointed out a 2 year old can mean a 24 month old or a 35month old. Add in the fact the 24 month old is a boy and the 35 month old is a girl and the gap increases.

I also think that the culture of, In Reception children should be able to achieve A and B. In Year 1 it is learning how to do C and D and if you get to year 2 and your child cannot do these things then your child is abandoned is not helping. Bringing this forward to nursery and if your child cannot do the things they want your child to achieve by a certain age what then? Is your child going to be abandoned? Is your child going to be written off before he or she has set foot in school?

I have a girl and a boy and the difference between their milestones at a young age was huge.

Are they next going to say all children should walk by 12 months and if they don't walk by that age then what.

A df's son didn't sit up unaided till he was 10months old, he didn't learn to walk till he was 23months old, he didn't talk till he was 3 1/2 and then you couldn't understand him properly. He was only just able to use the toilet a few weeks before he went to school. He is 15 now and heading for a bright career. He is doing 15 GCSES and expected to get As or A*'s in all of them. What would have happened if he had been written off before he had left nursery.

Don't the parents play a role in teaching these things?

Yes of course, but point being made is that some parents either can't or won't. So to ensure every child has the same start, the state has to ensure nursery provides these things.

But nigel aren't those things exactly what he's talking about?

My DS2 will start school in September (May birthday) and if he can't go to the toilet independently, dress and undress, sit and listen, communicate clearly, eat his lunch without help, count to ten, write an approximation of his name, know colours and shapes and numbers etc then I'd consider I'd failed him as a parent. He goes to nursery 2 days a week, I expect them to support him in acquiring those skills, though it's my responsibility primarily.

I know at my son's school they have a lot of problems with children arriving with no spoken English, not toilet trained, poor social skills, and though school do a marvellous job those children are massively disadvantaged from the start.
The criteria for the bottom levels of the skills on the EYFS made me want to weep, because I know there are children in my son's classes who are starting right from the bottom when they enter YR (I know they have changed the way they assess them again recently)

ExcuseTypos Thu 03-Apr-14 10:16:09
"nigel no one has said that young children should be doing reading, writing, formal maths , or getting them ready to sit tests. "

Today's Telegraph does seem to be saying that this is part of the new information given them by Ofsted:

"Ofsted will also:

Call on nurseries and childminders to regularly assess childrens abilities in the three-Rs"

Guinea I think pre-schools ime are far better than nurseries particularly the school attached ones.I think you're misled if you think nursery equals good quality.

Many nursery chains employ young poorly qualified staff.Personally I think a home/child minder setting with pre-school access is far better.

I've been saying this for a few years now. What's next starting them at pre-pre-school to get them ready for pre-school.

And those children who have been at home with a parent??!! These children are all under 4 FFS they don't need to be in formal learning in order to not 'fall behind'. It totally depends on the child's circumstances.

No one is asking any child to do "formal learning". Ofstead are talking about "structured learning" which as I said upthread, means planning and ensuring 3/4 year olds are able to hold a pencil, follow instructions, go to the loo, etc.

There

Enb76: Lower socio-economic groups on the whole do worse than those with money. There are plenty of reasons for that but it's not prejudicial to point it out.

So, shouldn't the government be targetting those families, rather than saying that the pre-school settings are failing?

ExcuseTypos: But it is true that thousands are failing. He has the facts and figures.

So why not give them?

I work in a year R class. The difference when a child has been to a good nursery/childminder and those who haven't, is astounding.

But were those children at a bad nursery/childminder? Were they at home in a poor environment (not meaning money but poor in basic resources and care)?

It makes me angry that people would complain that not all children deserve the same start in life.

I do think all children deserve the same start but it is not possible to ensure it. The DfE says that the best indicator of a child's success at school is the parents' input. Children from homes where the parents are not involved tend to leave school at 16 more disadvantaged than they were at 5. The educational setting is not as important as the home.

Excuse when did parents stop doing that?

Call on nurseries and childminders to regularly assess childrens abilities in the three-Rs"

Well that's not what the head of Ofsted has been saying today. It's the media exaggerating and twisting things.

Annie Lovely story about your df's son. My own DC received a Statement of SEN at 4yrs with quite a high level of funding. Since then has been discharged from NHS services and Statement has ceased, due to improvements. Now he is ahead of what is expected for the age group. Some would have written him off quite easily, the comments we received from supposed professionals were not all positive, I'm glad I never 'wrote him off'!

If parents are so poor at looking after their own children and the state knows better how come outcomes for 'cared for' children are so poor!

DC brought up in 'care' should have the best outcomes! The state is the expert

DH was in 'care' from 14 months to adulthood..he is now mid sixties...he left school functionally illiterate, was emotionally/physically abused, and has struggled his whole life...if I had a £ for every time in 28 years I have heard 'I'm fick' I would be rich!
He isn't thick at all..he was just told it so many times it's his default setting. He should have had a better outcome than his half siblings who were brought up by his mother. Although obviously this was a long time ago I've not seen evidence things are any better these days.

It seems the Government want to remove children from parents to bring them up in a uniform factory farm type environment. Scary!

I'm sure there must be a conspiracy theory in there somewhere

I think the issue is that the gap between children who do well and children who don't do well is school is already forming by the time they get to school. And this gap widens as time goes on, meaning some children are left far behind and disadvantaged in many other ways.

The Perry Pre-School Study is one where children who attended a high quality pre-school (HighScope) were tracked for over 40 years and the difference in outcomes for those children was marked. They were more likely to stay married, continue in education, and have a job, and less likely to be involved in drugs or crime.

Parental input is massively important, but sadly a lot of parents lack the skills to help their children.

Hmm. I live in Belgium and my dd's school experience was pretty much as he is suggesting. Teacher led maternelle from age 2.5/3. It was not about formal learning, but gradually building up skills through play. They did lots of arts and crafts, baking, trips, activities to work on their motor skills etc.

Mine did all this at a state nursery, but it was child led. At the age of 4 I remember by DS being able to put numbered bottles from 1 to 10 in the correct order, not because he'd been sat down and taught, but because the nursery was decorated with number groups and other information and he'd simply absorbed it all. On this particular occasion when the nursery was filming, there was a pile of numbered bottles and he decided (ie he wasn't asked) to put them in order. The first Foundation Stage year was spent by all three DCs dressing up, climbing trees (the nursery emphasised the importance of refining gross motor skills before attempting to refine fine motor skills), banging real nails into wood with real hammers, racing bikes round the garden, preparing and tasting a variety of fruit and vegetables, playing with water, playing in the sandpit, listening to stories, playing outside in all weathers (if a child wanted to play outside, then a member of staff had to wrap up and go outside with them). Altogether, this made them school ready, but with no formal learning to read or write and a minimal amount of teacher led activities. It was a marvellous, happy place.

Wipsglitter - ours followed High Scope.

bakingtins Thu 03-Apr-14 10:23:20

"My DS2 will start school in September (May birthday) and if he can't go to the toilet independently, dress and undress, sit and listen, communicate clearly, eat his lunch without help, count to ten, write an approximation of his name, know colours and shapes and numbers etc then I'd consider I'd failed him as a parent"

My ds (similar birthday) didn't have the fine motor skills to write an approximation of his name or use a knife and fork. Does that mean I have failed as a parent?

He is predicted quite good GCSE grades- does that mean I have atoned? Or can there be no atonement for having failed as a parent? Do I carry this guilt to my grave?

My dn did not speak clearly aged 4 and it took several years (as it often does) for speech therapy to have effect- so his parents presumably had failed too. At least they were fortunate enough to live in a country where services hadn't been cut.

Yes, I can see the arguments for picking up on these children early. But labelling people as failures because their children do not develop at exactly the predicted rate is counter-productive: it is just as likely that those children will write themelves off as failures if it is rubbed into their face too much. Ds nearly did.

Retropear do you live in cloud cuckoo land? Unfortunately many parents don't do that.

incognito

There are figures. This is from 18 months ago but things obviously haven't changed.
www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/9706275/Ofsted-third-of-five-year-olds-not-ready-for-school.html

And your last para is just excusing bad teaching. There are numerous examples of schools in highly deprived areas getting outstanding outcomes. If they can do it, so can others in deprived areas.

I've been saying this for a few years now. What's next starting them at pre-pre-school to get them ready for pre-school.

Starting playgroups, where they are left, at 2. Few years ago, when mine were that age, that was pushed at me. Many other parents bought into the idea.

Mine started just before 3 with a few morning to get used to being in a larger group and to give me time with younger DC. Youngest didn't. I don't think it helped them prepare at all - but they enjoyed it at time.

I work in a year R class. The difference when a child has been to a good nursery/childminder and those who haven't, is astounding.

But were those children at a bad nursery/childminder? Were they at home in a poor environment (not meaning money but poor in basic resources and care)?

Exactly this. For some children going to nursery (or a good childminder) will mean they are able to sit still/listen/eat tidily/take themselves to the loo which they would not have learned at home. Those children should be getting a free place at 2 already, and their families should be followed up to make sure they are starting to engage with the nursery to prepare them (also) for engaging with school. This is already in place, it doesn't need any kind of official change, it should just be happening.

Being able to use a pencil/crayon and recognise that books tell stories, and how you turn the pages, and that when you count the numbers go in a certain order, by the way, is not "pushing them to learn too early" - these are fairly standard skills for 3yos that they enjoy gaining. They should be able to get these in any rich play based setting though. It would have to be the woman with the 75 brats who's the unregistered childminder in Stella to not be providing these.