to wonder why kids need to be able to read BEFORE starting school

[M3lon]

Just reading this.

I don't get it. Surely if you are in charge of the education system it makes more sense to address the issue of why children that start behind never catch up than to try and work out how to make sure all children start with exactly the same abilities and experiences on day one - which is NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN, because children develop at different rates, are actually different ages when school starts and have starts in life that you can't make even across the board without some major re-plumbing of society as a whole.

AIBU to think the minister for education should focus on fixing the bit he is actually in control of, and make schools somewhere where getting behind doesn't mean you can never catch up?

I totally disagree with article, it basically writes children off at an early age. Children do learn at different rates, all chdten are different, we don't compare adults, so why do we compare children. Instead of putting the blame on the childten like it is their fault, how about looking at the education system, and the failures of it, and where has it go wrong. How Nordic countries which have a totally different play based curriculum for primary education have much high success rates, than our education system.

Dd 6 has developmental delay, communication ifficulty, speech and language delay. School are spying for an EHCP for him, he tends to go into a shell at school and just speaks one word sentences, at home full sentences. Education psychologist came to do an assessment of him and said that he had learning difficulties, very behind. I would hate that assment following him through life. That he can't do it, etc

For the record I was exactly like him, children do change and develop. The brain does develop. There is research to suggest the brain does not fully develop until 24 years. Well I was no good at school, would be known as backwards. I now have a BA (Hons)Psychology 2:1. MSc Psychology and hoping to do a PhD in clinical Psychology. So please don't write a child off, this article is rubbish!

When I told the Ed psychologist about myself when she asked about family history, she was shocked. And just said well the assessment was just for that point in time, it does not mean he will be like this always.

Aargh, pressed post too soon, before the "but".

But I have a couple of big issues with the focus placed on reading. At 4.

First and foremost, it feeds into the "schoolification" of early years. Too much, too soon. It never used to be like this. As I recall, in the 70s teacher friends cautioned my parents NOT to teach me what we would now call phonics and blending before I started school. And I wasn't disadvantaged by that slow and gentle start to reading. For my DS I deliberately chose a forest preschool that focussed on pre-reading and pre-writing skills, but other local options start phonics tuition, classroom time to "practice" sitting still at tables for Reception, etc, during the last preschool year. I would rather DS spent the time climbing (building core strength to enable him to sit still for extended periods - later), using tools and playdoh (developing the fine motor skills to hold a pencil - later), learning to take risks and be resilient (which will benefit him in his formal learning - later), etc etc. I'm troubled by the suggestion of an increased focus on reading metrics in the pre-school years.

Second, some children simply don't pick these things up easily or according to the mandated timetable, and a climate of blaming us feckless parents is really unhelpful. Again, anecdotal personal experience but DS was a late talker, despite every "advantage" of a language rich environment at home and close parental attention. Thanks I imagine to strained resources, no support appeared to be available apart from rather patronising advice to read to him and talk to him (which we did - but made us feel as though it was all our fault and we were letting him down somehow) and an SLT assessment which placed him on a very long waiting list for a block of SLT. I was in a position to pay an independent SLT, but we were fortunate to be able to do so. A friend (an English teacher, as it happens) is in the same position now with her nearly 3 year old, and finding it all deeply worrying and frustrating. It's not on to shrug shoulders and tell the parents it's all because we've been on our phones too much.

There's a strong chance DS has inherited his father's dyslexia and will struggle with reading so we've focussed a lot on pre-reading skills, listened to rhyme, played lots of I spy etc which will hopefully stand him in better stead in Reception than if we'd tried to teach an unreceptive 3-4 year old letters early, leading quite probably to him giving up on them early and internalising the message that he "can't do it". Oh and we've read lots and LOTS of books to him (we have a house full of them), he loves hearing stories and his vocabulary is (now - thanks independent SLT :-)) pretty fabulous, but he still doesn't have a Scooby about most letters of the alphabet, let alone being able to read CVC words at 4.5. Some children don't just "pick it up".

Maybe children who never catch up,won't, they might have SN, accept that as try to help them as much as possible, instead of making them feel bad because they can't. They might opt for a more vocational practical career, instead of an academic one.

I love how this thread has turned into a "my child was still in the womb but had a reading age of 15 and was doing differential equations".

There is a good reason why in some countries, children start formal education at 7. At 4 they are just so young, it puts pressure into children. Why are we seeing the rise of young children with mental health problems, stress and anxiety, and wanting to leave education at the first opportunity. What the education system is getting wrong.

Learning is supposed to be fun and inspiring, this education system does not!

I think we need to reverse this and look at what this government are aiming for in the longterm......because this is why the gist of the study will have been presented in this way.

With regards to early years, I think the aim is for formal schooling to start at an earlier age (a move towards school nurseries - 30 x 3-5 year olds with an early years teacher and TA, doing less learning through play and more target based learning).

In order for this to seem like a great idea, I think the belief needs to be encouraged that parents are consistently failing, and that many early years settings, as they are at present, are not fit for purpose. I

The blame being laid squarely with these 2 factors distracts from the fact that support services for parents are being cut, Speech and language services cut (or contracted out to Virgincare) and schools have to tick more boxes, and achieve ever more unreachable targets whilst struggling with teacher recruitment and morale and cuts to staffing.

Early years are a mish mash of school hours preschools, school nurseries and private services which provide childcare - staff are underpaid, sometimes under qualified and working in a sector which has little respect or understanding of their aims by parents and the public. Along side this they are now expected to provide 30 hours childcare - often in a set up which has not been designed for these kind of hours, has no reason able adjustment for children with sen and which leaves settings struggling financially (but fits nicely with the idea of school nurseries)

There have been similar overblown reports about the amount of children starting school in nappies....something that causes everyone to throw their hands in the air at the feckless parents and decry, 'what are they teaching them in Preschool?!' It is headline grabbing and fits agenda that fails to look at the lack of support for children with additional needs, the lack of early intervention for children and families that need extra support and the cuts to health visiting, children's services and surestart.

I think a similar thing is happening with the NHS, with bad press, services cut or contracted off and a blame game of 'lifestyle' health conditions, deserving and undeserving illness, A+E misuse and a sense that things is so overused that it is on the verge of collapse - as services and up in the hands of Virgincare et al, the privatisation of the nhs seems like the best solution.

I think the whole thing is a disgrace, learning is becoming a very stressful.and uninteresting for the child. Taking away at based learning for young children is disgusting, that's how they learn. What do they expect, young3-4 years sit behind desks. WY to put kids off learning for Life!

Hazeyjane and Aeroflotgirl yup yup yup!!!

Not rtft yet but saved to read later.

These threads alway go the same way on MN though I find because most people seem to have bought into the pervasive UK/US culture of more academics/at younger and younger ages/more hours in childcare approach

Despite all the evidence against it and the fact we (and those countries like the US who adopt similar approaches) have lower levels of academic attainment and more importantly, lower levels of child mental wellbeing and happiness

www.newscientist.com/article/mg22029435-000-too-much-too-young-should-schooling-start-at-age-7/

Absofriggly this should tell the government something, that their approach is not working. Look to Nordic countries, whose curriculum is totally different, they have higher academic rates. Its not my child that is broken Orr faulty, nor myself as a parent who tries their hardest with teaching my child at home, but the broken faulty education system in the UK.

Both myself & DH didn’t start school until 6/7, and while I could read early, he could barely read his name! We both did very well academically, but DH by far did better. Our daughter had speech & hearing issues starting school, so could not read at all, but now aged 8 she is consistently top in a year of 70 kids, and has been deemed gifted by the school & an ed P. Seems bizarre when we think of how far behind she was in Reception! Children are not robots programmed to learn at the right time or the right speed, they all progress in different ways.

Good article absofriggly.

think we need to reverse this and look at what this government are aiming for in the longterm

They want parents to speak to their kids and give them some real basic understand if language skills.

Plus those who can, be potty trained, know what a book is and how to ask questions and listen to the teacher ..... be actually ready to learn when they go to school

All that would be fine, greentulips, and perfectly sensible. But it's not what the article linked in the OP said. The article says "read" before starting Reception. Fair play, it doesn't say "read Shakespeare" but it does say "read simple words" which I think most people take to mean perhaps the child's name and simple CVC words. It also says it's a scandal if children don't enter Reception able to read simple words.

Those sorts of statements are bound to fuel concerns about "too much too soon" and creeping schoolification of the preschool years. Particularly as reading is something that's handily measurable, if you were inclined to want more metrics and targets at an earlier stage.

I have always been an avid reader and could read very well before I started school. I studied literature at uni and my house is stuffed with books. My DS, despite our best efforts, couldn’t recognise a single letter before he started school. We read together every single night, and his listening and comprehension skills were exceptional so I never worried or pushed him.

He has just finished reception and is exceeding in reading, and reads by himself for over an hour every evening, after reading to me and being read a few chapters. There’s no point pushing things until they are ready to learn.

That's pretty much how things are in our household, too, 10storeylovesong.

With having 2 relatively close together in age the difference between how they were taught or rather DD I felt was actually taught whilst ds 2 years younger was not taught at all
He was expected read and write and because he couldn't the lessons went ahead with him not able to take part.

This was 10 years ago.

Aeroflot Even vocational career courses require GCSEs