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.

Hobbit Ah, I see.

The 'blame game' does frustrate me though.

To me progressing a child's learning from their individual starting point is something that should be the primary focus. There is too much hand wringing and talk of getting other professionals involved after said child displays a few 'warning signs' of a condition and then when the diagnosis comes often too much '...well they cannot do this because they have X.'

Careful teacher assessments and focusing on strengths I think goes a long way in education. Yes, when medical conditions are involved there are additional strategies that may help. However a lot of them are fairly common sense. When helping a child overcome difficulties with reading, observing a child attempting to read or write can give away a lot of information. For example problems with missing out words or getting similar words confused and you might be looking at eye convergence skills, and the eye's ability to focus on individual words and letters, figure ground discrimination, etc.

well as a nursery teacher/reception teacher I would be happy with going to the loo on their own and not crying when they left mummy. anything else is a bonus.

children need to be children.

dd was being taught one more and one fewer (1 grape and one more is... 3 grapes and eat one is...) and to recognise names before the age of two... as she demanded it by grabbing my finger and jabbing it on the paper stating name (jab) "name" (jab)

ds on the other hand was not ready to read until half way through reception. he is doing absolutely fine now. he is not being taught any maths as he is not interested. he is learning lots of other things instead.

Those with both dd's and ds's must see the difference between a boy of 4 and a girl of 4.

Honestly - there is a difference but with my DC not as big as you'd think especially with DD2 being very like DS. Though I obviously can't account for how have a slightly older and younger sister has affected DS development.

Personally I've found it just as frustrating to be told DS is struggling to decode/write letters properly because he's a boy as I have to be told that yes DD1 is almost certainly dyslexic and that why she struggles to decode or still writes some letters incorrectly but we don't test till yr4 - then get to r4 there no point in testing .

In both cases I just want my DC supported and helped to get over their problems and make as much progresses as possible and luckily most of their teachers have wanted that too.

All children need structured learning.

You don't just wait and hope your child magically learns to use the toilet. You teach them and build up to it.

You model the use of cutlery; you read to them; you point out colours.

The example earlier from Sweden of children dressing up and playing outside to develop grosse motor skills before moving on to fine motor skills is structured learning. The children are doing fun things but with a defined "learning outcome" and purpose/ next steps.

Do I want my child continuously assessed in the 3Rs? Yes. Assessment isn't (necessarily) taking exams.

Watching a group of 3 year olds playing hide and seek and noting that the seeker can count to 10 before trying to find the others is assessment.

And it's only by assessment that potential SEN will be found.

The skills being suggested are things which MOST children should be capable of when they start school, and which ALL children should have been given the opportunity and support to get as far as they can with them.

If your child isn't developmentally ready, or has SEN which means they need more help and support, that help and support will be more available if the 20 - something other children in the class who could manage the basics have been given the structured learning which means they are managing them.

Can I just say something, do we agree that there are children who are not toilet trained before going to school nursery (aged 3-4)? Is there an increase in the number of children who are not able to go to the loo independently ie wipe themselves and wash hands properly, compared to 10 years ago? And is the solution proposed by Sir whathisface actually going to tackle that? And is it really a nursery nurse's job to educate children to do this properly, or is it the Parents?

Same goes with speech development. Are there any statistical data showing that there are more children aged 3-4 who are not at the expected level of speech development than let's say, 10 years ago? if so, isn't it the parents' role to engage with their child and make sure that their speech is developing well, at a good pace, from an acceptable age? Wake me up here, but please tell me that parents have something to do with this...

Barbeasty. What if the school just take the attitude that your child should be ready because it is said they should be.

Are there any statistical data showing that there are more children aged 3-4 who are not at the expected level of speech development than let's say, 10 years ago?

No, there aren't, despite handwaving from various bodies...

barbeasty
my point is exactly that children learn in a home environment and in nurseries/ CM's.
My grip is the government seems hellbent on forcing 2 and 3 year old into a school environment as opposed to the childcare options which already, on the whole do a good job of aiding children's development.
The ones who are being neglected to such a degree that they haven't mastered the basics by school age are not going to be the ones using nurseries/ cm's

gripe. not grip.

blue But parents are having to delegate a lot of the 'parenting' to nurseries though. Nurseries will not toilet train, but because a parent may spend less time with their child there is not as much time to devote to toilet training.

Ditto language skills.

Childcare settings have a difficult job too. There is less time to spend with an individual child due to child adult ratios. Yet the economy needs parents to work.

This is why I think the blame game is harmful. We are talking about shared responsibility here.

I agree capsium re. the ratios. CM's have far fewer children per carer than any other form of childcare, so how does the government think things will improve when you have school size classes for 2 / 3 yo.
If they are saying children aren't getting enough one on one for learning now I shudder to think what will happen with 1:20 ratios.

Hi Annie - they weren't recommendations, I am no expert :), Just what I would do if/when any of my children have educational issues. My eldest is only in y4 and a pretty average kid as far as I can see, no issues so far (apart from preferring football and minecraft over homework of course). The younger ones too - though we do have dyslexia in the family so I am aware to look out for it (my mother and brother, DP and his father are dyslexic) but no signs so far. Of course I have no idea (yet) how easy or frustrating it would be trying to get that or any other SEN diagnosed and supported. I think the point I was making more is that our kids have mothers, parents, who are interested and involved and would take action to try and improve things for their children (like you did with the home ed) - whereas some kids would just be left to stagnate in the same situation.

Funny you should say about state/private schools - where we are the private schools have a bit of a rep for only serving the able children and I know 3/4 families with children with SN who have removed them and sent them to the (worst rep) state primary in the area which apparently has much better SEN provision (you're right though, not the local Ofsted Outstanding ones which are seen as just as unsympathetic as the preps).

As far as I understand, Sir Sir Michael Wilshaw is saying that 'Nurseries are not preparing children for school' (bbc). Is that not clear enough? He is blaming the nurseries. Clear and simple.

Why can't the government look towards Scandinavia, for example Finland which is top of the educational league tables but doesn't start formal learning until seven?

I think introducing letters and numbers is fine if it's done in an informal, play-based way, but I don't think formal teaching should come until later - four or five year olds in reception are young enough. School readiness should focus on socialisation, going to the toilet unaided, doing up own coat and similar which previous posters have mentioned.

I'm certain the current government were never toddlers, I think they hatched from pods at eton at 13.

"Same goes with speech development. Are there any statistical data showing that there are more children aged 3-4 who are not at the expected level of speech development than let's say, 10 years ago? if so, isn't it the parents' role to engage with their child and make sure that their speech is developing well, at a good pace, from an acceptable age? Wake me up here, but please tell me that parents have something to do with this..."

I think that there are more reception children arriving at school with speech and language problems. However I think this is caused by massive cuts in the health visiting/ speech and language service rather than parenting.

It is really hard for a first time mum to know what is normal speech. Even if parents do recongise that little Jonny's speech is delayed then they don't always know what to do. Waiting lists for speech and language therapy and audiology are just far too long.

I am a fan of school nurseries, but many working parents find them completely impractial. We need better wrap around care so that all children can access school nursery for 3 hours a day. We also need to be realistic how much education a child can cope with at a young age. We need good wrap around care (prehaps provided by a creche or childminder) as well as good edcuation. Education and childcare are not the same thing.

There is a difference between formal teaching of maths and english and a teacher led activity. I feel that child initated learning has gone too far in the EYFS. Children enjoy structured activites like craft or learning to use sissors or any other skill in small doses.

The present system is like the emporor's new clothes. The idea that children learn and will be school ready with zero imput is naive. Well off parents help their tots learn the skills of concentration through music, gym or swimming lessons. My daughter can do proper breaststroke and front crawl (with correct breathing) at the age of four years old

She did not learn to swim so well through play or intensive hot housing. Our council organises well differentiated swimming lessons. DD has a lovely swimming teacher who relates well to under fives. The children have a lot of fun as well as learning.

The nursery I use does toilet training! Otherwise how would the DC who are in there five days a week learn to use a toilet?

Thanks preciousbane.
I know my way around a fish finger sandwich which I believe is an indicator of a good childminder on mn!

juneau That is good.

However, I have heard of some that were not at all proactive or even active in this respect though. People do not always get lots of choice, either...

I'd be gutted if my 2 year old was school ready, I love the playful innocence of toddlers.

But - dp and I were talking about this last night and decided that we thought that compulsory nursery may be good for some children from a young age.

Where parents are struggling or children are maybe not being exposed to good things then it could help. Maybe even with compulsory parental attendance for a session a week (so like parenting classes but more hands on workshops)

I know it would be a minefield but some children are disadvantaged and missing out.

"I'd be gutted if my 2 year old was school ready, I love the playful innocence of toddlers. "

No one is taking away the playful innocence of toddlers. Its about giving children good play opportunites and the chance to develop good friendship skills. Two years olds who attend nursery don't suddenly turn into frankenstien.

I think a nursery that only had children with social problems would be hellish. Every child would need one to one and there would be fewer children with good manners to act as good role models.

Really my 2 year old goes to nursery - he loves it. Still doesn't mean I want him to be school ready.

In interviews yesterday, he said 'school ready' meant things like being able to go to the toilet, to use a knife and fork, to be able to sit and pay attention for a few minutes (eg length of a story), maybe know colours and count a bit.

Now I know that 2 yos aren't reliable at those things, but I am surprised that posters actively do not want those things for their toddlers.

The sweedish set up sounds bliss. Do they put a lot more funding into it? I love the idea of real food, real plates, outdoor play etc.

My daughter loves the play based reception and is doing very well...but it seems a shame that they're having to spend so much time lining up, walking nicely, sitting nicely etc.