School using reward charts

[DisappointedOne]

I'll try and keep this short. DD is 4.5 and at a school nursery full time. She has been out of nappies for 2 years without problems.

Since February she's been wetting herself at school. Usually just a very tiny damp patch on her pants. Other times she's been completely soaked at the end of the day. It's taken a while but it seems there are 4 issues, all related to school (she had just 1 accident over the easter holidays).

Firstly she's terrified of toilet bugs. It doesn't matter how many times we tell her that washing her hands after going to the toilet kills the germs, she thinks she's going to get a bad tummy. (There was some stuff about her sucking her thumb which really upset her and I wonder whether that was used as some sort of incentive by her teacher.)

Secondly the nursery toilets are used by 30 3 and 4 year olds who have varying levels of control. By the end of the day they're in a terrible state, and DD would rather wet herself than have to use them.

Thirdly, DD thought that if she didn't drink anything, she wouldn't need to go to the toilet. Of course, that's not how it works, and her wee has been really concentrated by the end of the day and she's unable to hold it.

Finally, the structure of the afternoon means that there's no natural break for the children to go to the toilet, and the staff are very reluctant to prompt children to go. DD doesn't want to miss out so she's not going when she needs to.

Last week I spoke to her teacher and asked that she gently remind DD to drink water throughout the day and to go to the toilet. It happened for one day, DD came home dry, all was well.

Today she's come home with a reward chart - only because she was excited for us to see it. Had she not been bothered we'd be none the wiser. She gets stars for going to the toilet and at the end of the day can play with some particular toy that she loves. I'm seriously unhappy about it. I don't agree with reward charts, and am annoyed that the school have implemented one without even a mention to us. I saw her teacher this morning and she didn't say a word.

So, AIBU about this? Should I say something to the school?

I'm doing a level 2 psychology module with the OU as part of an open degree.

Then I recommend critically engaging with research papers being citing them in your work.

A reward chart is a brilliant way of getting a behaviour become a habit for a child.

Drinking sufficient water at school is a never ending battle for us, the school will only go so far in reminding the DC to drink their water. Rewarding amounts drunk with a reward has enabled DS getting into the habit of drinking, which is more important for me health wise than any potential issue with reward charts.

they're putting the onus for fixing the "problem" on DD

So the problem isn't the sticker chart, then, but the lack of action on other things? If there was a sticker chart and the lavatories were spotless, you'd be happy?

OP hmm to full time Nursery not being beneficial - I think the jury is out on that ... I've read contrasting research (DD1 was ft nursery because I had committed to something before having her. DD2 for various reasons wasn't.) I think there are pros and cons of both. But actually it makes very little difference in the long run...lots of other factors are more important.

And as to research and critical thinking - I was a research scientist and one of the first things you learn is to be objective and critical - take into account the reliability of the source, don't believe everything you read (even if it is peer reviewed) look for the flaws in the methodology etc etc.

(Eg. I read one piece that said FT nursery from a very young age reduced the chance of childhood leukemia. Read it a long time ago but iirc that was based purely on the fact that childhood leukemia cases in the former East Germany were lower than those in West Germany. The research concluded this was because before the end of communism all children were put in daycare at an early age. It was purely an observation - it took no account of different lifestyles, diets, etc etc... you could have chosen anything to use eg you could say it was because people in East Germany did or didn't have certain vaccinations, ate less (or more) processed food, drank more vodka ...)

Goodness me. I really do have better things to do that spoon feed you information that's already in the thread.

DD doesn't want to use the school toilets because they aren't clean. For some reason witnessing a child poo on the floor and another walk it through the class room has given her an anxiety about the toilets. I have seen them at the end of the school day and they're not in a good state. Such is life with 3 and 4 year olds who are generally just expected to get on with it.

She has avoided drinking at school in order that she doesn't need to go. Other parents are concerned at how much water is coming home at the end of the day. The teacher thinks that if they're thirsty they'll drink. So they don't get prompted to drink or go to the loo.

The teacher has made unacceptable comments to DD about thumbsucking. There has also been discussion of germs in the toilet. DD gets comfort from her thumb so again has decided that not using the toilets is a way around it.

Yes, the sticker chart is encouraging her to go to the toilet 5 times a day but it doesn't address those other things. It might work, it might not. I'm willing to wait and see. But as my first experience of school unilaterally implementing something I happen to be uncomfortable with and telling us afterwards, I have the right to be upset. What would your view be if they decided to manage it with negative reinforcement? Would that be okay because it's their choice to make?

Have you considered she is simply not ready for this level of independence from you? She cannot reliably take in enough fluids nor toilet independently (prompting). Perhaps wait 6 months? Not all children are ready for the distractions of a nursery or school environment that point. They aren't concious enough of their own needs.

OP hmm to full time Nursery not being beneficial - I think the jury is out on that ... I've read contrasting research (DD1 was ft nursery because I had committed to something before having her. DD2 for various reasons wasn't.) I think there are pros and cons of both. But actually it makes very little difference in the long run...lots of other factors are more important.

Not full time nursery, this is nursery in a school setting. DD is one of the eldest and very bright (she'd finished the nursery curriculum for maths and language by February and is now doing reception class work). There's no evidence here that full time education at 3 has helped the area achieve better academically or economically. Most people will cry about them "losing education" when all they really want is free childcare. They say that children need to be full time to learn welsh. Yet children in other areas only get 3 hours a day and are performing better all around. So there's some academic research suggesting that full time is of no greater benefit than part time, and other sociological measures show that it's not really having an effect. But still, they don't listen. They just want to know how they're supposed to organise getting their kids back at lunchtime.

When I worked in a nursery we did take the children to the toilet before snack and lunch but you can not physically make a child wee. You can't force them to sit on the toilet, if they tell you they don't want to go then there's not a great deal you can do, tbh.

You do not know exactly what has been said to her by her teacher about anything. 4 yos aren't reliable in telling you the whole truth. You honestly don't know that the teacher said there was germs in the toilet, it was more than likely a conversation about why it's important to wash their hands after using it and before eating. Your DD won't be telling you exactly what the teacher said about sucking her thumb, either.

I really think you need to let go a bit otherwise you are going to be a nervous wreck for the next 14 years. The teachers know what they are doing. Nothing what you have a problem with, apart from if the teacher called your DD a baby for sucking her thumb, is out of the ordinary. The teachers have to be able to do what they see fit during the day without running it past the parents every single time.

don't believe everything you read (even if it is peer reviewed)

it's particularly bad when blogs link to a couple of papers as evidence. You can easily find a paper to support almost any position, and unless it's your field and you know what are good journals and what the current literature is, that paper might be crank, withdrawn, superseded, low quality or just plain wrong (peer review isn't fool-proof). Most people reading your summary article won't chase the citations, and many won't have access to the journals anyway. Reading papers critically is difficult, and often not taught to undergraduates (they're given nicely groomed bibliographies). It's a shock when you start your PhD as to just how much low quality stuff in low quality journals there is out there. I'm embarrassed at how uncritical I was in early drafts of my thesis proposal, for example, and how grateful I was to my supervisor and others for spending a lot of time teaching me how to spot weak results.

It requires some knowledge of the field to spot weak papers, most people won't read them, many people can't read them: taken together, it encourages the use of marginally relevant, perhaps low-quality, often rather old work to give a "sciencey" or "truthy" look to papers. That's how crank alt-med and alt-sci sites get away with it; look at MMR, Cold Fusion, or more recently the XMRV scandal, to see how easy it is for people who want something to be true to find support for their position in papers which were, with hindsight, crap.

Have you considered she is simply not ready for this level of independence from you? She cannot reliably take in enough fluids nor toilet independently (prompting). Perhaps wait 6 months? Not all children are ready for the distractions of a nursery or school environment that point. They aren't concious enough of their own needs.

She was absolutely fine at school until February (which coincided with them changing the school day around so the afternoon - after their lunchtime drink - is now all about playing and singing and stories, none of which DD wants to miss). She's absolutely fine at home. We had no issues over the easter holidays or at weekends. She gets offered a drink routinely when I get one for myself. And in-between she will ask if she wants one. If we're out somewhere I'll ask her if she needs the loo when I'm going. I'm not constantly on at her to drink or wee, but I suppose I am reminding her and involving her in it. We've explained why it's important to drink. It's just not at the forefront of her mind (nor other children) to go and sip some water from the table in the corner when they're involved in an activity elsewhere. I wouldn't have thought it would be that hard to have a little reminder to all the children in the morning and afternoon.

Oh, and nothing in that article says it was teenagers who started those fires it says aesonsits. You're just jumping to conclusions and that's not healthy but says a lot about you.

You do not know exactly what has been said to her by her teacher about anything. 4 yos aren't reliable in telling you the whole truth. You honestly don't know that the teacher said there was germs in the toilet, it was more than likely a conversation about why it's important to wash their hands after using it and before eating. Your DD won't be telling you exactly what the teacher said about sucking her thumb, either.

I do know what was said actually because she admitted it. And we received an apology from the teacher for the upset she caused.

Oh, and nothing in that article says it was teenagers who started those fires it says aesonsits. You're just jumping to conclusions and that's not healthy but says a lot about you.

Not in that article, no, but in others they were asking for witnesses and information about 4 teenagers on bikes seen in the area. And 4 children between the ages of 12 and 14 have been arrested on suspicion of causing the fires over the weekend.

You've just explained why being FT Nursery is not advantageous - but not why it 'isn't beneficial' -if that makes sense. Your DD seems to be doing well academically...socially as one of the eldest she should also be ok.

Apart from the cost to the council - it isn't doing any harm and is helping out some with childcare - what is the problem?

Well they won't be the only ones involved, will they becuase it's a bloody long way from Newport to Port Talbot on a bike!

www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/group-youths---aged-12-9084977

I've worked in CAMHS and using reward charts is widespread. I don't see the issue with it.

Think maybe it's consumerism and making a quick buck as a minor celebrity that teens fixate on expecting instant gratification and reward rather than the fact that reward charts were used at school.

*Your DD seems to be doing well academically...socially as one of the eldest she should also be ok.
Apart from the cost to the council - it isn't doing any harm and is helping out some with childcare - what is the problem? *

It's very expensive childcare. The council are cutting other absolutely vital services for other more vulnerable members of society (Meals on wheels, libraries, leisure centres, community centres etc) to keep 3 year olds in school in the afternoon with seemingly no advantage. It also means that not all 3 year olds get places - in other areas there's a morning and an afternoon session - meaning that they're spending out on other settings for 10 hours a week for others. So some get 30+ hours, others get 10. By reducing to part time for all the children still gain the social benefits but aren't so exhausted and everybody gets the same. The current system isn't fair on anyone.

DS2 is 18, he did full time nursery in Wales. He started when he was 3.8, it did him absolutely no harm. In fact he is very bright, so he and a couple of others did it in reception class. Most of the rest of the children in the town did 15 hours, it was just the way it was. This was in 2000.

Whoopee.

Grow up, honestly.

Not going to the toilet in time because of being engrossed in exciting play is 'normal' and not uncommon. Hopefully the plan put in place by the school will help your DD with the issue.

I think you have to separate your hesitancy about reward charts, with your feelings about the unhelpfulness about the teacher.

Some of what you have mentioned rings horrific alarm bells for me. Not ALL children drink when they are thirsty, and if the teacher firmly believes that, and doesn't give them encouragement to go and take drinks of water then some children can suffer serious consequences from this. (DS1 is STILL on medication because of the side effects of not drinking sufficiently and he is 8)

It doesn't sound as though she believes in working WITH parents. She sees a problem and thinks SHE knows the solution, without any consultation with the child's parent. This is wrong on SOOOO many levels.

BUT - don't make this a battle over reward charts. If you have to see the head teacher to get help with this, you will likely put them off if you start this or include the battle over reward charts. You can point out that you're not really sure how helpful they are when compared to other possible solutions which would be far better, but don't discount them if the school wishes to use them ALONGSIDE other, more supportive approaches.

Thanks MakeItACider. Another child has had issues because she refuses to drink water, and the teacher has point blank refused for the parents to provide heavily diluted juice. She has had some dehydration issues, so no, I'm not alone in not being very happy.

I've tried to tackle other issues in a supportive way, and have done a lot of work to get things for the classroom that the teacher wanted for the children to show willing (head teacher now sends everyone to me as I'll get things done) and have stressed many times that DD is happy at school and has a good relationship with her. But issues like this do make me question whether they're expecting the children to be able to manage themselves a bit much at this age.

By reducing to part time for all the children still gain the social benefits but aren't so exhausted and everybody gets the same.

Except for the people who can't get to the nursery at lunchtime and therefore have to put their children into daycare with substantially worse outcomes. But I suppose that's the children's fault for not choosing parents who care, eh?