...to be annoyed by suggestion that children joining reception are getting weaker and weaker at doing what should be expected of them ....

[MoreVegLessCake]

.....because basically parents are rubbish????

I am a trustee of a grant-making charity and today we had a presentation from an organisation that runs nurture groups in local primary schools. We have already funded them, and they were reporting back on their work, though suspect they would like to get more funding for the future.

I am 100% supportive of work in schools to support the (hopefully fairly small percentage of) children who struggle for whatever reason - family difficulties etc. But the language used by the presenter and the way the whole issue was discussed really irritated me.

As parent of children still in/just out of KS1 I found myself feeling very cross at the message that the current generation of parents are more crap than those of even the recent past. Quoting from memory, we were told something like "children when I was teaching 10 years ago did not have nearly so many problems" e.gs cited were not being able to use a knife and fork, do up buttons, hold a pencil, concentrate for long enough, share toys, communicate in sentences.

We were told that nationally 40% of 5 year olds fail to meet the expectations of the EY Foundation framework, and in our town last year 47% did not. I get it that some families really struggle, as do some DCs, some parents probably are a bit crap, and extra help for all these kids is brilliant but if nearly 50% of kids don't meet the expectations at 5 years old, surely the expectations are too high??!!! It makes me feel really sad and cross that so many kids should be labelled as failing to achieve at such a young age.

Didn't help that my fellow trustees are either parents of adults or don't have children so they seemed to lap up the "feckless parents" talk .

So am I getting unreasonably upset or not?? Views from teachers in primary schools particularly welcome - I do really want to know.

Thanks in advance.

Ime working parents want the highest expectations. I know I do because I want my daughters to be really successful in careers. I worry about there being more competition in the future for jobs. Most couples have to both have decent paid jobs now to have a life. That is what makes me very focused on education.

Yes and there always the assumption that after school activities are the preserve of tarquins and Jocastas.

No they are not.

Not for me. Never met a tarquin. Never known anyone join mandarin on NCT. Every sahm is benefits or supported by a husband on a lower wage. As eldest dd has learning difficulties I never, ever want her as a sahm or completely reliant on a man. That is the biggest worry for me as you can't choose your children's partners.

I taught for 40 years, and would agree with the findings of the organisation that runs nurture groups about the decline in the abilities of 5 year olds, particularly with regard to social expectations, such as toilet use, eating, dressing and speech. Forty years ago children started school at 5, but few had previous access to playgroups or nurseries, therefore school was an entirely new experience for them. The majority arrived being able to feed themselves competently using knives and forks, dress and undress dealing with shirt buttons, ties, belts and shoelaces, and it was unheard of for a child not to be toilet trained.

It was also unacceptable forty years ago for someone presenting informed comments on a serious matter to use the word 'crap'.

I don't remember my parents sharing my play or my younger siblings play 30 years ago. You were in the playpen and then sent out to trail around after your siblings.

My parents didn't really share play either. No one did back then. Now when you have children round a lot of parents put activities on such as cake painting or painting. That would never, ever happen when I was young.

Schools and teachers have been sending parents the message for at least a couple of decades now that children will "pick up" reading, writing, etc "when they are ready". Similarly, the idea of direct instruction, rather than play-based learning in nurseries has equally been frowned on. I don't think it's surprising that these notions about developmental readiness, and the importance of children learning things "naturally" on their own child-centred initiative "when they are ready" rather than being "trained" have filtered down into the culture of parenting. Blaming parents for it is misplaced.

duggiecustard "Every sahm is benefits or supported by a husband on a lower wage."

Did I miss a big chunk of conversation? On a lower wage than whom?

On a low wage I meant. Real life sahming is not like on mn in many areas.

It was in response to ubik1s comment on assumptions regarding Tarquins and Jocastas.

I think language acquisition/speech/comprehension etc are a real issue. And certainly not just among the disadvantaged.

Children spend more time in front of screens but so too do adults. This makes for far less talking and listening.

I think as parents we need to accept this ( technology brings too many advantages to simply avoid it) but make specific efforts to alleviate the situation.

Similarly to the efforts we need to make to alleviate the effects of our DC taking less exercise than previous generations.

kesstrel Schools and teachers have been sending parents the message for at least a couple of decades now that children will "pick up" reading, writing, etc "when they are ready"

I have direct experience of this with biter 5. I was scoffed at, told she was
" Only Four " "Not ready for a book, never mind one with words"
and henceforth labelled the no-idea-about-how-we-do-things-now-a-days-pushy-parent not that that's new to me

Oddly enough the whole class was behind the curve at the end of the year and it wasn't because they weren't toilet trained..

duggie aha..seen. Had a "WHAT?" moment. sahm myself and didn't fit the assessment on either count

When my DCs were young there were programmes or articles on tv saying young DCs today cannot hold a fork, do not know how to sit at a table to eat their meals etc
I made sure my DCs sat at a table every night after that.

But that was around 1988 !!!!!

Some things don't change.

That doesn't mean that is how it will be for your daughters or that they will marry a kind man.

duggiecustard more than aware of that I certainly didn't on try no1 but DH and I are very invested in nuturing both the self esteem and education of all the biters.

There is a direct correlation between the level of vocabulary when children start school and later attainment. Children who come from families who talk a lot will have heard millions more words than the most language disadvantaged children. The quality of the parent-child interaction is also poorer: the language disadvantaged children will often have a majority of interaction at the instructional level "put your coat on", "eat your dinner". All of the evidence suggests that the gap gets wider as the the children get older.

IMO screen time is linked - I was often saddened to see some parents glued to their phone when they picked their child up. Some children are put to bed with the TV rather than a bed time story or parents will tell you proudly about the educational apps on their child's tablet - whilst these have a place, they cannot replace human interaction.

I work with preschoolers have done for 20odd years on and off and i have noticed little children are less independent than they used to be babied for longer is the problem imo. You read on here my dc is 36 months not 3 years old or they are just a baby dont listen to x about y they will do it when they are ready, these people are not fabricating to get more funding they are reporting evidence you have taken this way to personally yabu.

I teach secondary, and over the last 8/9 years I've noticed that the gap between the most able and least able is getting wider and wider. I've had a few anomaly years where the top set have been atrocious, but mostly they are arriving more bright and able than the previous year, and the bottom sets are less and less able with more students with complex SN and generally poor social skills and behaviour problems that then impede their progress as they struggle to actually engage with the classwork.

From my experience, things that have changed:

1. More families have both parents working full time and children aren't being supported at home.
2. More families experiencing marital breakdowns that have traumatic influences upon the children.
3. Phones and gadgets, but at secondary this impacts upon handwriting, concentration spans and time wasted in evenings instead of studying.
4. Loss of SN school and the insistence that complex SN can be dealt with in mainstream schools, when that is clearly not the case.

I'm sad that more children are arriving in reception without basic social skills. I really hope to be able to work on these skills with my children and be at home with them. It makes me really sad that so many parents who want to be part time/SAHP are unable to.

I agree there's been a drop in basic skills. I don't think it's fair to say its deliberate babying, or crap parenting. I'd say it's just become more the norm. If most people you know are reassuring you they are 'only 3/4/5 of course its normal not to be able to do x,y,z' it's unlikely you'd think 'well, actually they are capable so I should perhaps try and teach them'.

I think too the lack of outdoor play and physical activity is a huge part. It's telling that many of the 6yr olds I know aren't even able to competently ride a bike with stabilisers, let alone without. Whereas in my head 4yr olds should be able to do that and between 4 & 6 is the normal age to learn to ride without. Or the ability to walk a fair distance, if everyone tells you of course your 4yr old can't be expected to walk a mile, let alone 2, that's probably what you'll listen to.

There will always be able bodied nt dc who find some areas more difficult than the average, but that doesn't account for everyone. Of course sn, whether suspected or with a dx is different. But I think the general drop in standards isn't helping those children either. Getting a dx is hard enough anyway, and if your dc doesn't appear that far behind their peers, it's not going to make it easier. As a parent you may know that their peers just haven't been encouraged to develop those skills, whereas your dc has and is struggling in lots of areas, but to an outsider it doesn't help get a dx and support if your dc blends in as nt. I think if we went back 30 years, and combined the expected skills of toddlers to 8yr olds back then, with today's knowledge of sn, it would be easier to spot early on in lots of cases.
Not forgetting that if everyone did teach dc basic skills, teachers/ staff would have more time to support the kids who are struggling, whether that be sn or just an nt child who finds that particular skill harder.

I should have added that I find it strange too that many parents worry about their child being stretched in academic skills at school, but at the same time don't follow that logic when it comes to stretching basic life skills.

Brings it all back, all the suggestions that you were a shit parent during Key Stage 1. Fortunately ds did grow out of a lot of his issues, others were down to Aspergers. I really regret the pressure I put on ds to conform to the expectations of the Early Years Foundation Goals. He was my first born I was wiser with the second.

The two children who are starting school with DD who have toileting issues both have medical reasons for the problems. And their parents have tried everything to help their children. One of them probably has the medical issue as a result of prematurity (but with no other medical/special needs). I wonder how much an increase in premature babies surviving and actually doing better medically than those who survived a generation ago is an issue for starting mainstream school.

I think the developments in nappies may be a factor in later toilet training. Toddlers may not experience feeling wet as nappies are so absorbent.

I think that with universal early years provision there is a big range in the quality of settings and the opportunities offered within those settings. DD1 attended two nurseries. When she moved at 2.5 there was a big step up in what they offered and expected in her new nursery. She was given scissors, no bibs at lunch, no nap unless she was really flagging, a name card shown regularly so that she could recognise her name within weeks of starting and a load of more challenging things. It meant that things changed at home too. As our first child, we followed nursery to a certain extent, and we upped our game accordingly. I'm sure her old nursery would have got on to these things eventually, but with less time to practice before starting school. The difference between the nurseries was down to a few factors: higher staffing ratios; shorter hours (so they saw themselves primarily as pre-school education, not childcare); older, more experienced and better qualified staff (most had school aged children). The second nursery also has an excellent reputation for working with children with SN and inclusivity added an extra dimension to the experience of all of the children. The first nursery was ofsted 'good', the second 'outstanding'. Both were private, for profit nurseries. The quality of early years education makes a huge difference and I think that the settings that really do it well may be in the minority.

but there are also a hell of a lot of very very normal 3/4 year olds who, given a choice, will spend their days flying around on a trike or up to their armpits in the sandpit constantly

But that is exactly what 3/4 year olds should be doing.

We have a big problem with early education in this country that we are obsessed with teaching 3, 4, 5 year olds to read and write and do abstract calculations. Yes, Reception is also about playing, but there is also a good deal of formal learning. And much of it IMO is pointless.

3-6 year olds should be focussing on language and communication skills, independence, self-care, social skills and physical development. Literacy and numeracy at 6 is fine, once they have those vital basic skills in place.

Instead many Reception teachers are drilling children in phonics when they can barely string a sentence together. What's the point? We don't actually produce better educated children than those countries that put a big emphasis on language, physical and social skills first.