What age would you put this child at?

[Cbeebiesisdifferentonasaturday]

For writing etc? Any teachers to give feedback would also be very helpful 🙏

Neatness isn’t as important at this stage. I’ve seen pages of neat nonsense with awful spelling and I’ve seen awful handwriting with great sentence structure and good spelling. The latter is harder to grasp.

In my daughter's reception class they really push the phonics hard, they are all expected to read and write about 50 graphemes independently by the end of the year. They have done a phonics test already. They also do quite a bit of maths. I think this is standard, I know people with children in several local schools and they seem similar. They do spend a lot of time playing as well.

YY to the adrenalin and hook fueled dramas and the problematic manga. There's a lot of dreck out there.

Children are able to enjoy and absorb language in material like Beatrix Potter, Winnie the Pooh, and other well-written literature, including poetry, from a young age - 2/3 and up. They are absorbing language organically in these years (some are absorbing more than one language).

There is no need for the graded readers for grammar. Children absorb norms through exposure to conversation and by being read to. Punctuation is an element of reading and writing that can be explicitly taught in the school setting, but if reading has been done right by the person who usually reads to the child, it will quickly make sense. There is no need for a child of four to understand punctuation.

It looks similar to my daughters writing when she was in Reception

I remember when DS started at a new school in year 6. He didn't write joined up, and spelling was low-average, his writing had always been his weakest area. I was so relieved when his teacher praised his imagination, varied sentences and extensive vocabulary.

4-5

5 . 6 tops.

About 4 I guess. Though it’s a while since mine were that age.

Just seen you’re in France and so start lessening to read and write a bit later. Honestly
don’t worry about it. French kids grow up to be perfectly literate adults and how well they can write at 5 isn’t really a predictor for future brilliance.

By starting at the beginning and whizzing through it because they are so ready.

You can have a look at the UK standards by finding ‘year 2 writing exemplifications’ and the national curriculum on the gov website. This’ll be for older children than your child - but it’ll show you what’s expected by the end of year 2. You can also look at the ‘year 1-2 common exception words’ - which is basically the spelling list which UK children in year 1-2 ‘should’ be able to spell independently, according to someone?!

In one class, you’ll have some kids writing and reading better than some adults, and some kids who can’t spell ‘cat’. It’s a complete mix of development, related in only a very small way to their age imho.

There aren’t UK standards. Do you mean English standards?

(children in Welsh medium schools don’t learn English until
KS2).

Not all children would be so cooperative. I didn't understand why I was being asked to read such simple books, so the school didn't believe I could read.

This is an article I just found about phonics in case anyone is interested:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/two-thirds-of-american-kids-cant-read-fluently/

Certainly it seems that literacy levels were higher in the UK when phonics were not part of the teaching, and when traditional or formal grammar was part of teaching.

@mathanxiety you said research supported use of phonics, are you able to give some references? Through the 1960s and 70s and beyond language became somewhat politicised in the UK, academics were encouraged to be radical and to reject rules for the sake of rules - not great for literacy, in hindsight, it seems. Was the push for phonics part of that radical and "progressive" context?

I agree with you about the reading, and about how many fantastic books there are for children. But disagree about the need to learn grammar. Formal grammar was taught in the UK to all children before the 1960s and levels of literacy were significantly higher. Formal grammar has been continued to be taught in academic schools - eg my school - since then - and again significant differences in literacy levels, command of language, levels of communication between those with a knowledge of grammar and those without, percentage of students ending up as professionals or in work they really want to do. Makes it easier to progress faster, helps with idea development, self concept, communication, gives confidence. Makes it much easier to learn foreign languages - knowing the rules around English grammar makes it much easier to learn French grammar. Doesn't hold back creativity. Doesn't stop children reading a range of literature, comics, encyclopaedias.

Re Biff and Chip, FWIW asked my (older) DC whether they had liked biff and chip and they said "And Kipper! I liked them, they were funny! Time Chronicles stories were quite exciting." So a recommendation from them, anyway!

I'm not sure how this is any different than starting at 4? Lots of them have been taught other things at nursery or incorrectly taught things at home (mispronouncing phonemes, only writing in capitals etc) so not sure why it would be any different at age 6.

I think a massive part of why our education system isnt good in this country is because politicians use their personal experiences to skew their expectations just as you have here: 'I could read at 4 and noone believed Me so all children must start at 4 incase the school don't believe them.' Rather than looking at what research says and what other countries, who are better than us, are doing.

I didn't say anything of the sort of what you've put in quotations. I am saying that it's not as simple as pushing what we are currently doing in the UK at age 4 back to age 6.

5 ish

I agree. I also think they think education is good therefore doing more sooner must be better. But I don’t think early childhood brains benefit as much from that style of education as they do from a more free form exploration.

3 ?!?

4-6

I also work as a TA at a primary school in the UK. Like many posters said above, you can see children writing like that in reception (and would be an able child given the correct use of punctuation and spelling), or in Year 1 or even Year 2 (but in this case it would be a lower Year 2). In extreme cases where children have learning difficulties you can see children who are in KS2 writing like that.

Based on your posts, it seems your DD is a keen learner, so I wouldn't worry too much even if you decided to come back to the UK in a few years. If she is a little behind she will catch up quickly given that she seems like an able and capable child. Follow her lead, if she likes writing you can provide opportunities through playing, have paper and pencils/crayons available for her to use, write letters, cards, shopping lists, books for her toys, etc. Read with her at home, and again, follow her lead.

I taught my two DS to read in my native language before they started reception. My first one learned to read in English with phonics in Reception and was a free reader by the end of Year 1. My second one was so keen to learn to read in English in addition to reading in his first language that I bought phonics books and he picked up really quickly and could read fluently in both languages when he started Reception. But the problem with DS2 was comprehension as he only started learning English when he was 3, and there was a lot of vocabulary that he could read using phonics but didn't know what it meant. But he picked it up very quickly and by Year 1 he was a year ahead of what his average level should have been.

likely be good at sports, science, maths as clearly needs to be written off with English already

Building a competitive weird standard for children by Mothers is far more damaging than some slight differences on letter formations of a 5yr old 🤣

OP what a lovely written piece by your Lo. I would be so proud. Doggyland sound fab. I would be pleased that she enjoys writing as is the best stepping stone for success.

@Sweetnessandbite Thank you ☺️

Also what they do at 3,4,5 has no bearing on what they do at 13, 14, 15 … or 23,24,25. I think this idea that these early years are so portentous is extremely negative for all - for the precocious starters who then strive ( or can’t) live up to their early promise, and for the very bright who aren’t necessarily thinking within the four corners of the page at that age and may get fed messages that undermine their true promise . It just isn’t that relevant.