To think 4 year olds just shouldn't be in school

[Belleende]

I will start by saying I know very little about educational theory, I just sent my DD off to school the term after she turned 4 as most parents do.
As the year has gone on she has begun to struggle. She hates the noise. She struggles with concentration. She is definitely taking her time tuning into the more social side of things.

We had been wondering if there was some kind of special need there. Now Covid has hit and we are the teachers. I have come to the conclusion there is nowt wrong with her, she is just too young to be in school.

She is a young 4 and summer born. She has the attention span of a gnat, and we have to fight to get her to do reading and writing . But she has a huge passion for knowledge and love of the outside, and her memory is amazing.

Not sure what to do when this is all over. Can't help thinking she would be better off home schooled until she is 6 or 7.

Anyone else rethinking the education of their kids?

Left my summer babies (may/july) til 5 (in Ireland is not unusual now) and so glad I did. They 12/10 now. My 3rd will be 4 in July a very bright sociable little thing but there's no way I'd send her September. She be (hopefully!) going back to playschool / childminder 3 days a week that I work.

@bookworm14 & @Drivingdownthe101

I meant from my own perspective - I know people do it & I've no doubt some kids are fine but for me & my kids personally it would have been a no had they been June/July/August babies - thankfully I'm in Scotland & they were all winter born so it wasn't an issue.

I think when you send your kids at 5, it’s extremely hard to imagine sending a 4 year old. DD went at 5.5 and, when I see the difference between her and the kids a year younger in her class, it is just so obvious that they would be better off in nursery. BUT maybe there’s also a different expectation from them than from kids in a Reception class in England. An R teacher knows they are going to have kids who just turned 4 - some just turned 4 year olds can’t wipe their own bums properly or do up buttons. Whereas a P1 teacher in Scotland is going to have 4.5 year olds at the youngest and nearly 6 year olds at the oldest. Maybe the expectations on the kids are different.

When I was doing my research a couple of years back I came across teachers who had worked in both systems.
They concluded that P1 was much more formal than Reception. Some Reception rooms don't have desks.

I think it must be rare to have almost 6yos (September deferred) and 4.5 yos in the same class. If its an area where most are deferring then there will be few if any 4.5 year olds.
I don't know why councils agree to funding extra years nursery without good reason. I wonder if the attitudes will change when they are funding 30hrs nursery education.

I do think this one depends entirely on what 'school' is for that age group and what the expectations are. A play-led flowing setting with learning through doing in the true sense and a focus on finding one's place in the group and the world, four is a great age. But where the misconception reigns that 'school' has to be about the absorption of formal learning from the beginning and you have four-year-olds' grasp of phonics being fretted over and 'fun' worksheets and flashcards coming at them every which way, then it's too young, and unnecessary. But an idea has arisen in the UK that child development, particularly of the academic kind, is a race. In the region of Germany where I live, parents have been campaigning for the cut-off date to be moved in a way that would raise the starting age to make sure that everyone was 6 by starting (currently starters are approx 5.10 to 6.10). There is a much more distinct cut between informal (kindergarten-based which is much as I describe at the beginning of this post - not compulsory but very few children don't go, particularly because every child has a right to a placeand parental contributions are income-based or absent) and formal (school) learning, which has its own issues, as does the pedagogical approach in some German schools, but there is a real cultural sense that around 6 (or even 7) is the 'right' age to start and having had two children go through that system and another one to start soon, I tend to agree. I think very little is gained (except in rare cases of particularly advanced children) in turning out cohorts who can (or rather are supposed to) decode phonics at 4. Mine went to school at 6 and nearly 7 respectively with a little phonics taught occasionally and informally by me and the one who struggled with reading would have struggled a lot more younger. The other was reading within weeks.

The fact that a lot of parents have their children deferred here (it isn't always accepted but the bar isn't very high) and some children still repeat years means you can have a big range of ages within one class. One of mine had a child two years older in one of his at one stage. In practice this makes very little difference overall - unless you think it's important that everyone crosses the 'finish line' at 18.

BUT maybe there’s also a different expectation from them than from kids in a Reception class in England

In DD’s school (England), Reception is a huge, free flow room with doors to outside. The children can go outside go play at anytime. They do 20 mins of phonics in the morning sat on the carpet, all other learning is completely play based. DD2 (who started school at just turned 4) loved it. DD1 (who started at nearly 5) moaned that there wasn’t enough learning and there was too much playing. Both of mine could read before starting school which may have made a bit of a difference, but neither of them seemed to feel any pressure from the demands of Reception... the opposite in fact.
Im obviously now homeschooling them both (one in year 1 and one in reception), and DD2 has been bored with the activities suggested by her teacher (Reception) so has been doing her sisters year 1 work.

(I should perhaps add that the one who struggled was the one who went at nearly 7 as one of the older children in his year. The other was 6 and 3 months and among the youngest)

Reception is a huge, free flow room with doors to outside. The children can go outside go play at anytime.

That just would not happen in a P1 class. Wandering off to do what they want. No not in Scotland!

Year 1 is far more formal Blackbear19 so I guess that corresponds more to P1. Reception in our school really is just an extension of nursery/pre school.

As I had two go into reception in consecutive years, the first being an autumn born (so starting at nearly 5) and the second being a summer born (starting at just 4) it was quite easy for me to see the differences. Actually the play based approach of the reception class was far better suited to my summer born, my nearly 5 year old was ready for a more formal style of learning when she started.
They both had the same teacher too, who said that although DD1 had a far better attention span when she started, DD2 more mature emotionally and handled the social side better.
So it all just depends on the child.

I started having just turned 4 a couple of weeks earlier. I was ready for more stimulation, and already learning to read before I started school - I absolutely needed to be there and had no problems settling in. As PP said, it really depends on the kid.

Just reread my posts and the typos are horrific, I shouldn’t type before my first coffee of the day!

Drivingdownthe101 yes I think so more like year 1. But remember on average P1 children are 6mths older starting rather than Reception kids.

When I was hunting around for info I could find that the summer borns did 15% poorer in GCSEs than older classmates.
I could only find one longer term study on oldest in year verses youngest which was a Swedish study who actually found that the youngest kids did better in the workplace and on average out earned their older classmates when they were 35.

I really think more studies should be done on the learning styles of kids and which is the right age for kids to enter formal school. And a UK oldest vs youngest would be a good to know.

Yes I know that on a population level summer borns do less well than their older counterparts. On an individual level, there would have been no sense in deferring my just turned 4 year old. She could already read, was extremely independent (toilet trained at 20 months, dressing herself fully from 18 months etc), had a firm group of friends who were going to the same school at the same age (all of which are the older ones in her year group). She is still younger than DD1 was when starting school (DD1 was 4 years 11 months when she started, DD2 is 4 years 9 months now) but is thriving academically and socially.

Totally agree with you. 8 years ago I had to send my son who turned 4 in August; no way was he ready and I was told he would miss reception if we held him back. It is way, way too young and the pressure starts the moment they begin; I wouldn't be remotely surprised if they now have a SATs trajectory in reception. The horrendous pressure to conform and fit in, endless rules, all the fun gone out of learning, dealing with the awful kids, awful teachers; delay for as long as possible or look at other options.

They concluded that P1 was much more formal than Reception. Some Reception rooms don't have desks.

Some local authorities in Scotland are using wholly play based learning for P1 extending up to P3. But you also should remember that you’d never find a just turned 4 year old in P1, where you would in Reception. Surely Year 1/P1 would be a better comparison given the children are all 5-6 so similar ages.

I think that’s the point though Jellycatspyjamas. People on here are comparing the Scottish system with the English system regarding school starting, but actually reception and P1 aren’t really comparable.

Jellycatspyjamas I did compare P1 to Y1 but that's not a great comparison either Y1 have already had a year of school and on average are 6mths older than P1.

Y1 is probably closer to our P2, if you look at the ORT and I think I looked at a Maths curriculum which was the same R/P1 Y1/P2 so the aims of teaching are the same/ similar but the formality of P1 is more formal than Reception

The bottom line is systems need a bit of flexibility to suit children maturing at different rates and to account for a child who on paper is 4, but born 3 mths early and who should really be in the year below.

Yes, a friend of mine’s daughter was born on 29th August, 3 months premature. This was before there was an option to defer summer borns. Her daughter (now 9) is meeting all expectations thankfully. There is now some flexibility of course, as anyone with children born between April and August can request to defer. I chose not to based on my child and her maturity level, but I know a few who did, which was the right decision for them.

There are so many things that you have to be "ready" for to start formal education.
Being academically ready is quite a small part of it, I think. But usually when people say their child is "ready for school" or "bored in nursery", that's what they are really referring to.

The thing is, if nursery had 4 and 5 year olds, and even 6 year olds there, it wouldn't be boring at all. Being able to play with your friends all day long, inside or outside, in a building full of age-appropriate toys and activities - what could be boring about that?

Well by ‘ready’ for mine I meant that she was emotionally, practically and academically ready. She had been toilet trained since well before 2, dressed and undressed herself for years, could tie shoelaces etc, had a group of firm friends, was already doing activities like ballet and gymnastics... she was more mature emotionally than her sister who started school at nearly 5. So ready in all senses of the word.

Blackbear I guess it probably is unusual to have such a wide range of ages in a P1 class but DD has two Autumn born deferred children and then three Jan/Feb born not deferred, so the oldest child in the class turned 6 several months before the youngest turned 5!

The thing is, if nursery had 4 and 5 year olds, and even 6 year olds there, it wouldn't be boring at all. Being able to play with your friends all day long, inside or outside, in a building full of age-appropriate toys and activities - what could be boring about that?

This!

Yes it's too young if we're talking about formal learning? I'm not sure how the British system works and how much "academics" play a part in reception? If it's play-based it's fine but if they're sitting children down and preaching ABCs and 123's at them then I would definitely defer my child if possible.

Where I live you don't have to enrol your child until they're six. My DD is almost four and while she's bright and articulate I would not be happy to send her into a formal learning environment this year. She's taken an interest in writing lately and loves to learn but as soon as my DH applies any pressure and tries to "instruct" her (he thinks the earlier the better for academics ) she loses interest.

A Sudbury school opened up in our area a couple of years ago and I'm seriously contemplating sending my DC there. Before I had DC I would have thought it was hippy nonsense and my DH would have a heart attack at the idea (I haven't mentioned it yet!) but from observing my DC and others I think adults often get in the way of children's learning, by trying to "teach" them things they'd naturally acquire through their own curiosity, in their own time.