To not understand why children start school so young in the UK

[Alisvolatpropiis]

Just that really. In lots of countries children don't start school properly until 6 or 7 whereas in the UK it is 4 or 5, depending on where in the school year their birthday falls. I know some in the SW Valleys area who have started school (not nursery) at 3.

Britain doesn't appear to be topping education charts from what I can tell so what is the benefit?

I'm confused as to why moving to academy status is a stick. Many schools have chosen to do this and they look to be less accountable once they are academies. Why is it a punishment for schools?

It is imposed by the DfE if a school fails. So it is a mark of shame.

'Those schools that don't apply the baseline check in reception years will need to reach an 85% floor target in reading, writing and mathematics in year six – well above the current floor of 65%. Only around 10% of primary schools in England currently reach the 85% target.

Schools that fail to meet their targets will be deemed to be failing by the government, and in the case of local authority maintained schools, vulnerable to being converted to academy status.'

If you her a chance please go work in a year 1 class like I do and them you will see the immense pressure on teachers to hit targets and the subsequent pressure on the children to hit those targets.

Might I suggest you try and get some experience in a year 1 class in a different school. Perhaps one that hits those targets while using a continuous provision based one through reception into year 1 if you want the complete other end of the spectrum.

Like I said, that is the way your school chooses to do it. It isn't the only way. any schools hit those targets without having to put that pressure on the children.

math I wouldn't trust that any school that is using P levels in EYFS has a clue what they are doing. P levels are for children in the last term of year 1 and older who have special needs and are working below the level of the national curriculum.

I get that it is being used as a punishment, but I still don't see why it is actually a punishment. It is obviously a hassle if it isn't what you wanted, but why is it actually a punishment if other schools are choosing to become academies themselves? And how would making a failing school an academy actually improve it?

Can I ask that all of you who support parental choice for your summer born children to start a year "behind" contribute to the current DofE consultation:

www.education.gov.uk/consultations "changes to the school admissions code". There is a specific section regarding summer born children.

I have a particular interest in that DS who was 4 end August started school last week and while he seems to be doing ok, I feel a year down the line he would have gained so much more confidence. He would still have had to go to childcare but would not have had the pressure put on him. We had a list of expectations for starting school. Normal state school. I'll always be sad that he didn't get that extra year of playing because of his birthdate. Some children are more than ready and they should be able to go. But some children develop more slowly and parents should have the choice, not the state.

I agree. My son is about to turn 7 and only now is starting to read and write. Up until now we have been told how behind and had talk of assessing him. Its all nonsense. He was just too young.

It doesn't improve it at all. It's just an attempt to look like doing something to improve failing schools.

Where it becomes a problem is that some academies can be a bit of a law unto themselves and have little regard for their actual legal requirements. Particularly some of those that are trying to improve results to move themselves out of special measures.

Yabu, I think it's a good age to start school. Why wait? A lot of children are already used to doing longer hours in nursery/ childminder, they are happy there, why wouldn't they be happy at school?

We had baseline assessment when my eldest started! It was then dropped - not because it wasn't useful but because it too too much teacher time.

Pros: it tells the teacher where each child is in being "ready" for school/reading etc. So can lead to a more individual approach.

Biggest Con: it takes a lot of teacher time (you can't sit a whole class of pre-readers with a test booklet, so it has to be done 1 on 1). the results was that for a lot of time in the first few weeks of school, the teacher was testing and two TAs were looking after the rest of the class.

Pico -- Academy conversion.

What happens is admin of the school is frequently taken completely out of local hands. It can either be brokered into the hands of a national academy chain or become part of a federation of schools, whether loose or tight. In either case, the school ceases to be locally accountable (to the democratically elected LA) and since the parents often do not have any choice as to where they send their children, they have to suck it up and hope for the best with little hope of having grievances addressed if they arise.

I'm from Finland where school starts at age 7. We just moved here from there and I am still unfortunately waiting for a school place for my year 6 daughter, as the bleeding county council still hasn't processed her application (applied Aug 5), but as soon as we do get her to school, I should have first hand knowledge of what differences there are between her and the kids who have been at school since they were 4.

In Finland school starts at the age of 7. At the age of 6 it is recommended that all kids go to a preschool, which is 4 hours a day. So you could keep your kids at home until then, but in real life, very few people do.

In Finland child care is extremely cheap, full days including all meals cost £200/month and if you have low income, it can be free. So most kids are in daycare (kindergartens etc), unless their parents are at home and not working, when it is legally ok but socially not very acceptable to send your kids to day care. But you still have the option of play groups starting at age 3, and those are usually totally free of charge to anyone. I had my son going to a playgroup 3 times a week for 3 hour sessions and paid absolutely nothing. The mentality in Finland is kind of like unless you work, you need to take care of your kids yourself until they go to school. Homemakers are not very common in Finland, except now that there are a more unemployed people due to the economy not doing well.

My son just started reception here, and although he's been in the play group and for a few months before that, in a Montessori nursery/day care, unlike his classmates, he doesn't read or write at all or even draw very well. Very few kids in Finland read or write when they're 4. But I am not worried, not very likely that what he can or cannot do at the age of 4 will have much effect on what he can when he's a grown-up :-D In his playgroup, they, well, played a lot. But what I can see about his reception class, it looks a lot like a Finnish day care setting. Hope it doesn't get too much sit-down and be-quiet in Year 1. I don't know how my son will adapt to that...

My year 6 daughter has been in full-time day care since she was 14 months old, as that is when I went back to work. It was a Montessori setting, as well as her school (all state funded and free), so she did learn to write very early, at the age of 5, and read fairly soon after that (that's how they do it in Montessori, as children learn those things at each age they are best adaptable for, and usually writing is more natural for kids than reading). So hers has been a bit more formal kindergarten than it normally is in Finland, but still it was definitely no school, with no curriculum stating she should be able to count to 100 at the age of 5.

I guess I do see a difference in kids here and it must be partly due to school starting so early and learning being emphasized even in play groups. The English kids in general seem more polite, courteuos, and well-behaved than Finnish kids. Also, kids are more controlled and their parents seem to watch them very closely even in playgrounds, I mean don't allow them to get dirty or climb to high places or go down the slides head first. They can sit down and be quiet at the age of 2 whereas my youngest, almost 2, cannot be quiet for more than 2 seconds. I get frowned upon a lot here with my three wild monsters. Oh no, now I sound like I raise 3 jungle kids... some free education freak... I am not at all that, the kids just are different and I hope to get mine to fit in here, may take some time, though.

School start is too young for formal learning. Should be a rich type nursery situation. My blood runs cold when I hear people say that a nursery is really good as they are learning the alphabet. It is for this reason that so many very young children are labelled as having reading problems when they are needing the maturity and experiences to appreciate the abstract nature of such learning. Of course there are many children who do cope but many simply learn they "can't do it".

Happydays
what on esrth are you on about
My dcs learnt jolly phonics in nursery. It was through song and play. Most patents will have taught their child the alphabet song long before nursery.
Formal school does not start until year 1 and its a lot less of a shock to the system than those that start at 7 in europe because we have far smoother transition.

It is held by phonics purists that the alphabet song actually interferes with a proper phonics approach where the names of letters are not introduced, just their sounds.

And singing of the alphabet song does not mean anything as far as learning to read through phonics goes unless they are exposed to a pure phonics approach, apart from confusing children if they are aware that the 'elemenopee' song refers to letters of the alphabet. Unless a child is aware of the letters themselves and able to identify each one, it might as well be supercalifragilisticexpialidocious that they are singing, or a song in another language entirely.

I am surprised that posters are not aware of the pressure to ensure children hit Reception targets, and seem not to understand that whether children are ready or not, they will be barraged with phonics until something sticks because the targets and the tables are very important. Yes the goals are reached through song and action. But the songs and actions are there with very specific intentions behind them. This is what is different about the experience of 4 yos in Britain compared to 4 yos elsewhere.

The perception of a difference between 'formal instruction' and instruction that involves singing, etc., is missing the point. Formal instruction means any teaching method designed to achieve specific targets. It may look informal or play-like, but the targets make it formal.

But with phonics once you get past the basic letter sounds they do need to be able to identify the letters by name, otherwise it gets confusing (DS is struggling with this) when they say how do you spell house, is is hh-oh-uh-ss-eh? Because although they're right about the letters, the sounds are not, we don't say ho(h)useh, the actual phonic code is /h/ow/s/ but the spelling of /ow/ is "ohw, yoo" and it has a silent "ee". But this is confusing when the child is more familiar with letter sounds than letter names because then they're not thinking about the sound of the word when they're trying to spell it. When /ow/ can be oh-uh (OU) or oh-wh (OW) or oh-uh-g'-hh (OUGH). They need to know the letter names to properly be able to talk about the different spellings but keep the sense of the word being decodable to sounds.

That is one reason why pure synthetic phonics isn't the greatest method of teaching children to decode and spell in English. It is confusing to many children.

As others have said, in countries where "school" starts at 6 or 7, kids are usually in some kind of kindy etc. from 3 or 4.

The trouble with this early-years stuff not being compulsory is that it provides a get-out clause for authorities not to pay for it. Because school is compulsory, education authorities etc. have to find places and fund them, no matter what. Once it becomes a matter of "choice," the funding often disappears at times of austerity. Not in the Nordic countries, perhaps, due to their famously generous welfare systems. But in most other countries, yes, this may happen, esp, in times of austerity when governments are looking for easy targets to slash. In Tokyo, you are not guaranteed publicly funded kindy places and there are often shortages. We ended up having to pay for a private one. If we had been poor, we would have been screwed.

It's particularly worrying if children do not speak the national language at home, because you will delay and delay their learning it properly and they may not catch up if you leave it too late.

But when children have to be in school at four there is the tendency to make sure there are results to show for it, and thus 4 yos are supposed to reach targets in literacy and numeracy. Already, with funding or partial funding for nursery care or childminding in Britain, whether direct or through tax credits, the government has set standards and targets.

www.gov.uk/progress-check-at-age-2-and-eyfs-profile
'Providers need to carry out 2 main assessments of the children in their care:

• the EYFS progress check at age 2, which consists of a short written summary of a child’s development when they are between 24 and 36 months
• the EYFS profile, which summarises and describes a child’s attainment at the end of the EYFS (ie at age 5)

Both assessments look at a child’s progress in the following 7 areas:

• prime areas of learning: communication and language physical development personal, social and emotional development
• specific areas of learning: literacy mathematics understanding the world expressive arts and design

'A Know How Guide' -- 34 pages of creeping schoolification of childcare for 2 year olds.

This is a case of anal retentive accountants making sure everyone looks busy enough to justify the expense of having them on the payroll.

They dont have to be in school at 4. Yhe law is term after 5th birthday

My two dgs go to a village school where Nursery and Reception share a classroom, a teacher and two TAs. There are just 15 in each year group and uniform is optional in Nursery but most choose it as it is simple polo/sweat shirt with grey trosers/skirt.
Certainly the boys loved it and dgs2 has just gone into Y1 free reading and socially well adjusted. He will have 2 years in that room now and his brother has moved to the Y3/4 room.
They did go to a private preschool for a year before nursery and that was wonderful too and they could have stayed there till age 5 if the school nursery class hadn't been able to take them.

Which phonics purist has said that the alphabet song interferes with a proper phonics approach? As far as I know thy support children being taught it alongside phonics.

The 2 year check is unlikely to be anything that US paediatricians aren't going to be assessing anyway. And there are plenty of literacy and numeracy standards for 4 year olds in pre-K to be working towards.

They don't have to be in school age 4 but then they will generally miss reception and start in Y1 unless the LEA agrees they can defer for a year and so be "behind" a year.

Reception is generally agreed to be a crucial year. This is why I request those who think parents of summer born children should have a choice comment on the DofE consultation.

They really do have to have a place secured by age 4 in most schools. Otherwise parents risk not having a place available for Y1. It may not be compulsory on paper, but it is necessary in RL.

Rafa, in Jolly Phonics children initially learn the 42 (or more depending on how you count) sounds of English rather than the alphabet letter names. The sounds are not taught in alphabetical order, but in specific groups.
s, a, t, i, p, n
ck, e, h, r, m, d
g, o, u, l, f, b
ai, j, oa, ie, ee, or
z, w, ng, v, oo, oo
y, x, ch, sh, th, th
qu, ou, oi, ue, er, ar

The 2 year check is unlikely to be anything that US paediatricians aren't going to be assessing anyway.
It is only proper that the two year check should be done by a pediatrician.

The problem in Britain is that
(1) the two year check is being done by people who are not medical professionals and who have no background in pediatric neuroscience, and
(2) instead the check is being done under the aegis of the DfE, which means that what is checked and what is considered important is skewed towards literacy and numeracy and formal education readiness.

To repost:
'Both assessments [i.e. at age 2 and age 5] look at a child’s progress in the following 7 areas:

• prime areas of learning: communication and language physical development personal, social and emotional development
• specific areas of learning: literacy mathematics understanding the world expressive arts and design'

And there are plenty of literacy and numeracy standards for 4 year olds in pre-K to be working towards.
There are no uniform standards for children aged 4, simply because public schools do not for the most part have PK4 classes. No league tables are produced to allow parents to compare and contrast their school with others.

This is the Mississippi attempt to formulate a state standard for four year olds that it is hoped will contribute to the overall literacy goals for school leavers aged 17/18.

Some examples:

Craft and Structure
'4. Exhibit curiosity and interest about words in a variety of informational
texts.

1. With prompting and support, identify the front cover, back cover, and title page of a book.
2. With prompting and support, identify the role of the author and illustrator in informational text...'

'Fluency

1. Display emergent reading behavior with purpose and understanding (e.g., pretend reading, picture reading)'

Numeracy -
'2. With guidance and support, model real-world addition and subtraction problems up to 5 using developmentally appropriate pre-kindergarten materials.'

There is however a good deal more detailed focus on social /emotional development and communication with adults and peers than anything I have seen in the UK (St Cedd's school for example). Pps 27 to 31 are concerned with this element, in great detail.

I think this stuff is only chilling-to-the-blood if one is of the opinion that there is no place for phonics or number learning before 5 or 6 or 7. I'm not of that opinion, so .

math the paragraph under the one you posted, and the document you linked to both point out that the 2 year check is only on the 3 prime areas, not all 7 areas. They are assessed on personal, social and emotional development, physical development, and communication and language, not the 4 specific areas.

Jolly phonics in reception teaches one representation of the 44 sounds + the main alternative spellings. It actively encourages the use of an alphabet song alongside this. Or at least it did the last time I used it. Possibly they've rewritten the handbook since then.

1 or 2 of those maths standards are higher than the equivalent expectation in reception, although most are fairly similar and some are lower.

Might look a bit more closely when I have some more time but some of those expectations look a bit lower than those I have seen for other states. Some of the planning I've seen makes reception look like daycare. Pre-K is not what is was 10-15 years ago. There's a lot more structured learning than there was. Although it probably differs from state to state and school to school.