...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.

I think kids are babied for longer. I know reception kids who haven't been taught to wipe their own arses. God knows what their parents think will happen when their kid has a dump at school.

It's a combination of 'they will do it when they're ready', plus parents not making time. And not allowing their child to fail.

I know someone who doesn't want their ds to wipe his own arse in case he gets poo on his hands. But how's he going to learn? Let him have a go and teach him.

We dont have reception in Scotland so i get confused to what happens in class do they teach numbers and writing to just gone 4year olds?

In my experience, some parents don't realise that 3, 4 and 5 year old son are capable of a lot and enjoy taking responsibility for themselves. I think of my husband's nieces in this case. When I first met them they were three and not doing much for themselves, but they were only three. Now they're six, the expectations haven't changed. They still can't do anything for themselves. Crucially, they aren't expected to at home. Not even the simplest task, such as carrying their plate to the sink after their meals or putting their rubbish in the bin is asked of them. They demand their parents do these things for them, and they do, without question.

They're treated like toddlers and they act like toddlers. It's a bit depressing, really, to see their development being stunted completely unnecessarily.

I think I was probably more independent at 5 than children generally are today but I don't think it was because I was given more attention by my parents. I think parents are more risk averse now. It was normal for 4 and 5 year olds to be playing out without a parent in sight and so you had to be independent.

Not read all the comments - I can't speak for the majority or the statistics. If it's true that there's been a decline in children's abilities then I'd be inclined to blame screens too! (Hate the things!) My children have restricted access to screens. They are allowed to use the lap top and tablet, because I think in this day and age you would be hindering them if they didn't know how to use them, but they have a time limit . . . they're not allowed to sit on there all the live long day!
Having said this, when my DD1 started Reception I did feel that the expectations of such little children were too high. They were basically expected to take care of themselves completely. I'm all for promoting independence, but if a 4 year old puts her shoes on the wrong feet after a session of P.E. in the MORNING, the parent should not be collecting them in the afternoon with their shoes still on the wrong feet! Just as an example

I guess so i was walking to school at 6 tbf it wasnt that far away but you really had to be able to look after yourself. Saying that a 5 year old unable to put a jacket on shows its swung to far the other way

• Clam I said that the incentive has been removed for some to persevere as hard as they might have, as there's no bar to them starting school. However, there are parents who don't see it as you do, as an embarrassment. There are plenty (I'm afraid) who take the view that "Oh, school will sort them out." *

Have these parents said "Oh the school will sort them out", or are you assuming that that they don't see it as an embarrassment?

I have heard a few parents discussing children who are not toilet trained or have to wear pull-ups as if it's shameful/unclean and why aren't these kids toilet trained. I had to stop them and tell them that DC has had toileting issues. My child has sensory problems and possibly ASD (still waiting for assessment) but it only became apparent during toilet training. DC just can't feel it but we only found out after two years of trying to toilet train. DC can't feel alot of things hence writing/doing up buttons/getting dressed/fear of loos/not even feeling when done a poo but one would never be able to tell from looking at her.
I'm sure that there are some people who just think i'm a rubbish/lazy parent who can't be bothered to toilet train DC, because it makes them feel superior that they got it so right, and I didn't. DC2 was toilet trained before DC1, so I know it's not me!

IPad usage MAY have impacted some children yes. I agree with that. However, DC1 never used an IPad/screen device but DC2 does so doesn't really tally up. However, I agree that IPad usage gets in the way of alot of more productive activities.

But also consider that SN appears to be on the increase. Less special schools. More SN kids included in mainstream school so that these problems are more apparent. More budget cuts meaning it takes ages to get diagnosed on NHS. We've been waiting for years! Sensory problems are not easy to spot unless they are severe.

You are not allowed to attend our pre school unless fully toilet trained by 3.

I've only read half the thread and will go back and read the rest, but just a couple of comments as I'll have forgotten them by the time I've read everything.

Despite not wanting this to turn into a WOHP/SAHP thing, I do think it has a bearing. More children do have both parents working out of the home and spend time in childcare than previously. However, many more are looked after by grandparents which might account for those who are babied; not only do grandparents these days have a tendency to spoil the children more than the parents do - and therefore possibly do more for them - they also worry more about them getting hurt on their watch, so are possibly less likely to let them take risks.

Another aspect of the working parents issue is the time factor. I know for a fact that when my children were younger I often did things for them that they should have been doing themselves purely and simply because I was in a hurry and didn't have time to wait for them to do it. Also for having them in a pushchair for longer, didn't always have time to let them walk sooo sloooowwly and investigate the world as we travelled. I only worked PT so still did do the toddler group activities and did talk to them as we were walking or travelling on the bus, but I do think they missed out on a bunch of other things.

Mackem the most disadvantaged children often have a sahm. They are often the ones lacking in skills as it is poverty that is often the root issue.

A preschool that is saying a child cannot attend unless they are toilet trained, is breaking the law.

A parent or carer has to come in and change them so it is often too difficult.

A parent or carer cannot be made to come in to change them.

Does anyone have any actual figures for the 'loads of children starting school in nappies'?? A quick google shows some articles which make no mention of whether children had additional needs, medical issues or went on to have these - just a blanket, throwing hands up in the air.

My mum and I were talking about this the other day (age of toilet training) - she ran a preschool in the 70s and I work in one now. She said that children were toilet trained earlier, but there were a lot of accidents and she reminded me of the enormous 'knicker cupboard' in the headmistresses office in my first primary school. I think that for some children training earlier when they aren't ready can lead to issues down the line. I really don't see what the problem is with teaching a child to do something when they are developmentally ready - and children develop at different rates, so teaching a child to use the toilet at 2, may be right for some children but not for others.

You are not allowed to attend our pre school unless fully toilet trained by 3.

This is not allowed - preschool and school have to make provision for a child whether they are toilet trained or not.
??Any admission policy that sets a blanket standard of continence, or any other aspect of development, for all children is discriminatory and therefore unlawful under the Act (Equality Act). All such issues have to be dealt with on an individual basis, and settings are expected to make reasonable adjustments to meet the needs of each child."
(The Preschool Learning Alliance)

Is this a recent change as it has always been like that at dcs school.

duggiecustard, I presume you're not in the UK.

Yeah I live in England. They write it on the letter of entry when dd1 started. It hasn't been on middle dcs though so maybe it has changed.

If that is their policy, they are breaking the law.

It was definitely their policy in 2011 as I was worried in case dd wouldn't make it in time so I made sure it was done by 2 and a half to get a few months to get it right. I am not sure on now.

duggiecustard Wed 09-Sep-15 11:07:12

Mackem the most disadvantaged children often have a sahm. They are often the ones lacking in skills as it is poverty that is often the root issue. < < < <

There have always been disadvantaged children, and unfortunately there probably always will be, but are these figures saying that children outside this group are starting school lacking the same skills that the disadvantaged children have always lacked? Because if that's what's being said then a lack of a SAHP may well be a factor for those children whose family fall into the 'working poor' category, or even the middle class category, depending on the childcare provisions being made for the children and the parents' commitments during non-work time.

Having now read the whole thread I agree with those saying that the lack of playing out is probably a factor, but I would add to that there are a lot of areas where the families are dotted about not living close enough to each other for the children to have other children to play out with. Or how about those living in cramped accommodation so that there is not the space for the children to play and learn.

Agree with Hazeyjane.

They need to be ready.

I was told by another parent "the trick is not to never put them back in pull-ups again" whilst pre-school said do not toilet train until they are showing signs of readiness (which never happened) otherwise it can cause psychological problems. School also told me not to worry about it. It is not always as simple as having the time or will to do it. I was a SAHP. I had loads of time. DC just didn't get it.

We dont have reception in Scotland so i get confused to what happens in class do they teach numbers and writing to just gone 4year olds?

Yep, my niece was born August 29th, shew started school aged 4 and a couple of days and had homework as well.

This is the reason they originally put in the childcare for the disadvantaged 2 year olds in the last few years. The reason they did this was the statistics stating that below 16k household income were less likely to have these skills.

There are a lot rubbish parents out there really. A friend was babysitting neighbours son. Last week he took the first steps. His mother was outraged "because now he will be into everything"
Just unbelievable.

I suspect that it's more complicated than a change in parenting methods.

What about HV care? I suspect austerity means that there is less professional advice given to parents in person. For some mums, official people are their only source of child development information and cutting checks means that children are slipping through the net. I'm surprised that Dave hasnt got HVs doing assessments on babies and toddlers to see which percentile they are on academically. [rolls eyes]

I think a child development leaflet could be sent out with the primary school application pack. What should a Reception child be able to do/know? is an annual question on here and if "interested" parents have to google then you can assume that others won't have a clue either.

I do not believe that SEN was properly dealt with in the past. I remember a boy who regularly soiled himself and I would bet that the school didnt deal with him with the compassion that current teachers are obliged to. I would also bet that children with Autism, ASD, ADHD etc were just considered strange or naughty rather than children needing extra support. Pretending that SEN doesnt exist is probably why more children seemed "normal".

The comment about 50% not meeting expectations in funny because surely the expectations is that an average child should be able to achieve them and that 50% is the average child.