Keir Starmer "sick and tired" of hearing about children who aren't school-ready

[Kirova]

I get the point he's trying to make, of course, but it seems like a stick to beat parents with (and particularly mothers, of course). There's no sense in saying you want all children to be in the same place when they start school. Apart from anything else, some are nearly a year younger than others in their cohort, so clearly they are not going to be in the same place.

My youngest daughter was born premature, has a significant hearing impairment and various other difficulties. She will soon be two, and while she's doing brilliantly, I doubt she'll be "school-ready" by the government's current definition when she is four.

Not sure what my point is exactly, it just seems like another absurd over-simplification on the theme of failing our children, state of the country, etc.

As a retired reception class teacher, the Headteacher would not accept any child that was not toilet trained, so that had to rapidly take place before admission if not there already. Seems you can't say that now! SEND apart. Why is this not a priority for some parents?

Except the age at which children start school hasn't changed for decades - I started two months before my fifth birthday in 1965. I and all my classmates were toilet-trained and I only remember one accident at school - a poor little boy in Assembly one morning (they poured a bucket of sand over the 'puddle' and took him away to get changed, but the reason I remember it is because it was so unusual as to be remarkable). So, what's changed in recent years?
And it was the Tories who absolutely decimated funding for programs like SureStart as soon as they came to power in 2010, which is a great pity as it provided significant support to families with children under five, improving educational outcomes and reducing hospitalisations for children from disadvantaged backgrounds. The Tories spent 14 years destroying our public services and now a Labour Govt, that's only been in power for 14 months, gets criticised for saying it's not good enough, we need to do better and they plan to make it happen. I have no idea why some people find wanting to stop the backward slide in standards so controversial.

The answer is quite simple then: don't send them to school at the ridiculously early age of four.

In Finland, children don't start school until age 7. There is still early years support up to the age of 5. They do not subscribe to the falsehood that quantity of time spent in the classroom translates into quality of education (I am an educator). Unlike British education, which is predicated on metrics, Finnish education emphasises creativity and hands-on learning. Finland has exceptionally high literacy, numeracy and adaptive problem-solving skills; likewise Japan. Both outstrip standards in Britain.

We've got this backwards and standards are in decline. I see it with every new cohort of undergraduate students, at which point, in my discipline at least, rather than building on what's gone before - the whole point of higher education - I have to go back and undo the damage done at both GCSE and A' Level.

IMO, the British pre-16 education system has long been unfit for purpose. Not content with that, we've now started on HE and ruined that as well - and done it in record time. My one-time passion and absolute commitment to my profession is now well and truly dimmed. What's happened to our once world-class system is an utter travesty.

The problem with Sure Start is that it never attracted the people its service was chiefly targeted toward. People like me used it. Some of the demographics who would most have benefited from it were not being reached.

He probably means the children of crap parents who don’t toilet-train their children. They don’t prepare their children at all: routine, stories, basic manners etc etc. I have several relatives and friends in nursery education and social work. They see these irresponsible losers on a daily basis.

When people talk about children not being school-ready they are generally talking about typically developing children. There will always be a small number of children who have difficulties or have had adverse experiences and are going to need a bit more time to catch up.

You are being ridiculous. You know he will not have been referring to children with extra needs.

This. Assuming all other aspects (disability etc) absent, it’s down to parents to make sure their kids are “school ready”

Please don’t worry, any SEND needs she might have will be taken on board seriously by any school. I think he’s talking about children who haven’t been toilet trained, no idea how to use cutlery etc. Becoming so much more prevalent in school. I get depressed by parents (minority) who don’t invest in these very important early years.

I'm not misquoting him at all - the words I've posted are what he said verbatim. Yesterday's Kuenssberg is on the BBC iplayer - go and watch it and confirm for yourself.

I did see this and was sure he was referring to the increase in non SEND children starting school in nappies and not being able to use cutlery etc purely because they haven’t been taught at home. Sure Start used to be really good at assisting parents with this sort of stuff; really wish it could be reinstated .

I used it in my area, I went to three different ones in total.

The two which were in deprived areas within walking distance of council estates were frequented mostly by the population that they were "designed for" although not exclusively. There was also a woman who used to visit frequently who was the very picture of a stereotypical MNer down to the well-cut hair and Boden coat. It actually didn't matter - nobody gave a shit who you were, I loved it there, it was a total lifeline for me and I was definitely "in the demographic" as a 20yo single mum (though in many ways I wasn't their target audience at all - I already followed safe sleep, breastfed until he was 4, car seat guidelines, talked to my baby, didn't smoke around him, tried to feed him healthily and not have too much screen time.)

The one slightly further from me was more mixed because it was on the site of the local primary school and the services were advertised to all parents at the school. Again great centre, brilliant staff, great community in general. The BF advice at that one was a load of rubbish but you can't have it all really.

I went to one a couple of times which was in a much more leafy/middle class area in the area that I lived before I split up with my son's father and that one was almost exclusively MC and felt more cliquey.

But TBH I think this focus on demographics is unhelpful. Parents can need advice regardless of their background. All the SS centres had breastfeeding advice, many of them had HV weighing clinics, they all had coffee mornings for getting to know other mums, the "leafy" one had a toy library.

The thing is I had a child at 20 and another at 30 and someone making a random judgement would put me in a totally different box each time. But I'm still the same person, I have much the same attitude. I didn't have as much access to money and support at 20 as I did at 30 and I obviously have more life experience now I'm older but I'm not fundamentally a different person.

In fact the baby I had at 20 took to school like a duck to water whereas the baby I had at 30 is struggling massively even though we are in one of those mystical countries where he's started at just turned 7. There's absolutely no way he would have been ready at just 4. (My youngest is that age and probably would be thriving/living his best life.) I am so thankful that he did have the extra time to grow and develop even though he is still having a hard time.

I'm not saying it's their defending, I'm saying I'm sick of the narrative they are putting out there. I'm also fed up of everything being about potty training which is ONE area they are going on about. The main difference is the expectation within the classroom in the other areas which drastically changed in 2014 after Gove's new national curriculum came in and creativity, play and socialising went out in place of sitting still. And yes I am a teacher.

Why has this suddenly become a problem? I'm 'ancient' but everyone in my primary school in '65 left with the ability to read and write; some better than others, of course, and the 11+ placed kids in secondary school into CSEs and the grammar stream. Mine was an inner London school from a predominantly working class background, with most in council housing (we didn't even have a bathroom!). But everyone was potty-trained. Came to school in clean clothes. No 'special needs'. No school breakfasts (some had free school meals). Sorry, but I simply don't understand the situation today.

My experience of Sure Start was similar. I also work with an ex health visitor who says it was the mix which was important, everyone rubbing shoulders with each other. The advantages of sure start 20 years on is quite remarkable.

Meant to link this
https://ifs.org.uk/publications/short-and-medium-term-effects-sure-start-childrens-outcomes

I kind of agree with him. Some parents are lazy and don’t want to parent. Some kids can’t talk because they aren’t interacted with. Some aren’t potty trained because parents can’t be bothered. Schools will know the difference between lazy parented children and children who need additional help. My twins have just turned 3 and have just started school nursery, they are babies compared with some in their class. But I’ve put in the time and effort to make sure they were potty trained, had good listening and communication skills, and could recognise all their colours, shapes, letters and numbers up to 20. Some won’t do this. And that’s the frustration.

It really is as simple as this. Come on, we’ve all met these kids - imagine multiples of them in a classroom. The excessive use of screens in under 4s is neglect tantamount to child abuse. It is really really dark IMO. Totally stunts mental growth and development. What we do about it - I don’t know. There have always been parents who barely parent but this plugging in, pacifying, and zombification with screens is new. And it’s creating a new breed of fucked in the head. I rarely post on Mumsnet but this issue is massive for society and not going away anytime soon.

Parents responsibility not teachers to potty train, learn how to use a toothbrush etc. Stop blaming politicians but being a responsible parent means being there for your child not on your phone, children being left on devices etc. It's awful, I see it all the time. Children in buggies, parent (s) with their headphones on. How do they talk to their child, interact with them? This is not going to go well for children so why have them?

I don't have evidence for this but I wonder if the parents whose children aren't school ready (not the OP's child, they will be prepared for her needs) are at the younger end of the age group & have little experience of kids apart from their own. They may not know who to turn to or realise how important these milestones are...and their mothers may have been the same. I was the eldest of 8 so I had a practical education in looking after babies - doesn't make anyone perfect by any means but it goes a long way. This needs addressing, if I'm right. It must be a strand in the the thread.

*defunding

My 2yo granddaughters half brothers are 7&5.
Until early this year they were BOTH full time in nappies, now I believe the 7yo is dry in the day.

This is entirely a parenting problem as in ‘why should I bother, let school deal with it’ and they aren’t the only kids in their school that are the same.

‘Thankfully’ none of the children are with their mother (who was the problem) and are able to thrive. My GD has been with us for 9m and is fully dry and ready for nursery.

No, I think he means that parents should get off their sanctimonious arses and get their children ready for school. After all they have over 4 years to do it, it can't come as a surprise. Other than if there is a genuine, medically certified reason, if a child is still nappy-bound then the parents should come into school to deal with the results of their laziness, taking teachers or teaching assistants away from their proper job is totally selfish.
Never thought I'd agree with KS though!

Similarly quick google search in UK it is 3-4. So that is only 6mo difference. Im sure there are 4yo all over Scandinavia that are not dry yet. But since the children are at nursery instead of school, it is not such a massive issue and there is more scope in nursery to work with the kids and families, in comparison to when you are in formal education where nappy change is not the teachers job.

Where are their dads?