Is it weird to keep her with me until 5?

[Whatwillyakkabetoday]

Dd, is 3 and an August birthday. Is it unusual to keep her at home with me until she turns 5 and send her the September after she turns 5?
I’m a nursery teacher so do lots of activities at home etc.
She wouldn’t have any pre school etc until 5
Has anyone done this?

Having seen young children (KS1) be yanked out of school for over a year due to covid and then come back ... don't do it. They are shockingly behind and don't know how to make friends or be around other children.

@sassbott

What? Why? You’re a nursery school teacher and you first hand see the benefit children in these environments get. Why would you deprive your child of these?

Is this for you? Or for the child? (It smacks me of the former).

And by the way, in my child’s reception year it was very clear the 2 children who had not been socialised via pre school. Every morning the meltdowns at the school gates were something to behold - these children were sobbing/ screaming and pushing their parents back from the school begging not to be sent. They regressed into soiling/ wetting themselves in school. And were quite unsettling influences within the classroom. I thought it was really cruel actually and not remotely fair on the other children.

I’m going to go back and continue reading but this needed to be quoted!!

Would’ve been helpful to include in the OP what country you’re in.

Especially when asking ‘what’s normal’

Maybe. But maybe not, I'm not sure you can be quite so categorical after a few words on the internet?

As a teacher in primary school, I wouldn't be as confident as you seem to be!

@ancientgran

Back in the 50s most of us were at home with mum until the term we turned 5. Children started in the September, January or April depending on when their birthday was. I only remember one girl crying and she was screaming and pulling the teachers hair as well, the poor kid couldn't speak English so it must have been terrifying for her.

We didn't have playgroups, not many nurseries as all the wartime ones closed so women had to give up work and let men returning from war have the jobs. Certainly in the inner city area I was in no one went to pre school activities. I remember it being confusing for a few days but we were all fine as far as I know.

'As far as you know' isn't that far though, is it? Just because only one girl cried when you got to school doesn't mean everyone else was ok. It's not just about going to school. There is being at school. The thing about 'back in the 50s we did x' is that we have progressed over the years because through research, test and observation we know children perform/cope/manage better if they have the chance to develop socially before getting thrown into school (at whatever age)

I would not advise anyone keeps a child at home because it's what we did in the 50s

It is unusual not to do any pre-school. Play dates cover some of the social skills, but don't cover the things that they have to get used to in a larger group - sitting still and listening in a group, taking turns to speak (quite different in a group of 15+ than 3/4), etc.

I don't know how it affects how they cope with being away from mum when they do start school, but I suspect that varies considerably between children. You might also want to get yourself used to being away from her!

She doesn't have to do pre-school every day. Perhaps look for a nursery where she can do a couple of days or half days. You'll still have loads of time to enjoy doing things with her at home, but she'll pick up those additional skills and begin to become more independent. Telling you what she's done while she was there is another new skill which she will probably enjoy.

I was a late August baby and I wouldnt start a just turned 4 year old in formal education, I'd defer a year. I would send a 3 or 4 year old to preschool though.

No preschool and just one "playdate" once a week or once a fortnight? Until after she turns 5? In a rural area?
This post is a joke, surely?

I'm not clear whether your question is "what year group would she go into" or "will she suffer from not being at school?"
It might be sensible for you to speak to the head at your local school and find out whether she'd go into Reception or Year 1 if she starts school the September after she tuns 5. She'll either be the oldest in her year group or the youngest.
I don't think it would be easy for her to go straight into year 1 unless she can already read at that point - whilst Reception is a lot about learning through play, they also do Phonics systematically and you wouldn't want her to miss that, unless you can teach that yourself.
It is difficult ( but not impossible) to change year group once a child has started school, but that could result in knowledge gaps, so it is important to make the right decision first.
As you are a nursery teacher, you must know some reception teachers - I think they would be best placed to talk you through the potential issues.
As for whether she will be OK home with you until 5, almost certainly yes. It is a comparatively recent thing for children to start school at 4, and to go to nursery or pre-school before that. When I was young, there were very few nurseries, and most children stayed at home until they were 5, mixing mainly with their own families. I think the mothers felt somewhat isolated but the children were fine!

@DelphiniumBlue

Your post is wasted. OP isn't even in the UK.

@HollowTalk

So she'd miss the first year of school? Why would you do that?

Because we send kids to school at least a year or two too early in this country?

@Jobsharenightmare is wrong about Scandinavia and @onlysomany and @Hollyhead are right. Although in Sweden, Denmark and Norway school is now compulsory from the age of 6 (Finland still 7, but 96 % start at 6), almost everyone goes to preschool many years before then. The whole society is based on two parents working, and for anyone other than people with extremely high incomes or extremely low standards, it is more or less impossible to live on one salary.

Swedish statistics from 2017 show that 50 % go to pre-school at age 1; 90 % at age 2, and approximately 95 % at age 4-5. So the fact that it is not compulsory is irrelevant - society 'makes it' compulsory.

(There have recently been parliamentary motions to make preschool mandatory from age 3 (party motion) and age 2 (individual motion).)

The comparison with the 50-60s is also not super relevant. Children today will start school with children today, and will be compared against other children today.

Although I am quite negative about the Scandinavian preschool model: too young children, too few teachers (no ratios, believe it or not in 'child-friendly' Sweden), too many hours (full-time + parents' commuting time is more or less the norm from age 1), I would struggle to argue the case that not attending preschool at all would be beneficial for an average child in today's UK.

So because she wasn't ready last month you are assuming she won't be ready in 10 months time?

Can't you do what you did this year? Try her and if you don't feel SHE is ready then pull out

I dont think it will be detrimental to send her to school a year later when the system would have done the same had she had been born mere days later. As a previous poster pointed out the outcomes for summer born children are poor just because we ignore that fact it doesn't make it any less the case.

I do think it would be beneficial for her to have some time in a pre-school though, it doesn't have to be every day. They aren't all the same though so have a look around, lots of different ways to do it.

I think it's great but she does need socialisation with peers in the form of group sessions. Pre school etc isn't necessary. Are you planning to Home Educate her from age 4 to 5? If so, your local area will have peer group activities within that community.

I wouldn't.

Worst case ask if she can start full time in January after doing part time in the autumn term.

You'd really be surprised by how well summer born kids keep up. She may be a little behind some for a few months but she'll surprise you.

Starting her a year behind with no exposure to schooling will result in a massive social/educational delay.

I've skimmed a bit, but I do see a lot of posters saying its normal for children in Scotland to start at 5.5 or in Scandinavia they start much later.. and I'd often wished I'd been able to start my August 30 DC later but its fine if all of them are starting later, but if that's not the case were OP is then her DC's classmates will all be getting experience of school socialising and structure earlier than her DC. That's not to say that her plan is wrong, just different, but I think it does need to be taken into account.
Also, her DC is 3 and it might be hard to imagine them coping right now but their development changes dramatically over the next year and they may be fine by the time they hit the right age for school. The one thing that my DC lacked starting reception was enough socialisation skills. They were bright and could keep up but looking back, that was the difficulty. Number two was fine because they were used to the playground and pick ups by that time.

@ancientgran

Back in the 50s most of us were at home with mum until the term we turned 5. Children started in the September, January or April depending on when their birthday was. I only remember one girl crying and she was screaming and pulling the teachers hair as well, the poor kid couldn't speak English so it must have been terrifying for her.

We didn't have playgroups, not many nurseries as all the wartime ones closed so women had to give up work and let men returning from war have the jobs. Certainly in the inner city area I was in no one went to pre school activities. I remember it being confusing for a few days but we were all fine as far as I know.

I mean this politely but you’re missing the point. It’s not the same as then all children were the same, and started at the same time. The op is taking about holding her child back when others will have two years of daily socialisation under their belt when her child starts.

In addition at that time children were more likely to play with their peers more than once a week or fortnight in a supervised one on one setting with mummy present.

Also we now know more about child development and what benefits socialisation brings, plus many more women work.

In this context all the other kids will be in pre school daily, and the ops will be at home alone with her.

@clockover 'As far as you know' isn't that far though, is it? Just because only one girl cried when you got to school doesn't mean everyone else was ok. It's not just about going to school. There is being at school. The thing about 'back in the 50s we did x' is that we have progressed over the years because through research, test and observation we know children perform/cope/manage better if they have the chance to develop socially before getting thrown into school

Well I was at school with them for years so if it had some dire consequence it didn't show up for quite a while.

One of my GC started school in September, I was asking her mother how it had gone, she said she missed her nursery so much, found it very strange that teachers don't give you a hug or sit you on their knee if you are upset. Didn't sound much easier than it was for us.

Is there any research about how the August born cope compared to the September born, they aren't one homogenous mass they are individuals with some being considerably older than others (11 months 3 weeks is a big gap at the age) some are going to be brighter or more confident, some will be big for their age some will be tiny, some have brothers and sisters. I dont think we can assume they are all the same and the OP knows her child far better than anyone on here, whatever research they have done.

Mine started school at 9, no problems, both passed the 11 plus 2 years later, both got first class honours degrees, both have post grad qualifications, both in happy relationships with good jobs. That might not work for others but they are my kids and I, with DH, made the decision that was best for them.

I mean this politely but you’re missing the point. It’s not the same as then all children were the same, and started at the same time. The op is taking about holding her child back when others will have two years of daily socialisation under their belt when her child starts.

I think you missed the bit about 3 intakes a year, September, January and April. That means they didn't all start at the same time.

Well I was at school with them for years so if it had some dire consequence it didn't show up for quite a while.

Or you didn't know about it. The thing is you are talking about a group of kids all at the same starting point, OP child would not be on par with her peers when starting school.

Mine started school at 9, no problems, both passed the 11 plus 2 years later, both got first class honours degrees, both have post grad qualifications, both in happy relationships with good jobs. That might not work for others but they are my kids and I, with DH, made the decision that was best for them.

It's not all about academia. Also, did you keep them at home with you the whole time with just the odd play date?

She doesn’t only see playmates once a week or fortnight, these are the planned, more formal meets for those not in pre school etc. We’re out most days, she encounters and mixes with lots of different people, attends birthday parties, dance class and the playgrounds 4/5 times per week

I am currently home schooling my 3 year old. She is 4 in April but will be attending infants that september. I love her dearly and am providing puzzles, games, flash cards, drawing and painting stuff etc. And have a schedule week by week. She also has 4 other siblings so she is definitely not missing out on social skills etc. I did that with my 3rd child too. And had him reading and writing two letter words by the time he started reception.

Oh for goodness sake OP.

Did you do this on purpose just so you can come back and tell people they are wrong? That's twice you have dropped in some vital information that should have been in your first post