To think it’s obvious which children don’t attend nursery?

[Omgshesaidthat]

I met up with a group of mum friends yesterday and it just got me thinking how to me it’s so obvious when a child doesn’t go to nursery.

From the group, only one mum didn’t go back to work after her maternity leave - at the time I felt quite envious but seeing her boy compared to the rest of the group now they are all 2 has made me think that I’m not actually so sure that being at home is such a good thing.

For example he’s not potty trained yet whereas the rest of the group are well on their way or totally dry and his speech is nowhere near as good as the others - even with things like numbers & alphabet, DD is parroting it all back to me whereas this little boy isn’t yet.

We did an organised activity and all the other children in the group sat nicely & listened and then participated whereas my friend’s boy just did his own thing the whole time.

My friend is a good mum and she does take him to playgroup and sets up little activities for him at home so it’s not like he’s just sat doing nothing all day. But it just felt quite apparent that you can’t recreate that nursery setting at home and the impact of children being in that environment and surrounded by other children is huge for their development.

Ah yes that makes sense. Sorry didn’t see your other reply

If you knew anything about child development, you'd know that under 2s don't benefit developmentally from being at nursery. In fact, there are studies that suggest in small babies it raises cortisol, affects brain development and can cause attachment issues.

From 3, attending nursery is much more beneficial as children are learning to move from parallel play to co-operative play and can practice turn-taking and following instructions (consolidating what they are learning at home)

I worked in a nursery. They're not teaching children to read. I'm not denying some children can read before school but they're learning that at home, not nursery. They learn the letter sounds and may practice writing their name at nursery but that's about it. We would have supported a child 1:1 if they showed interest in reading if we had the time and they had met the other early learning goals. That was before the increased ratios and before the increase in SEN so I wouldn't be confident there is much time for it now.

I don't think one child is enough for you to make an assessment! Not very kind judging other children, if they are 2 then that's absolutely fine not to be potty trained just yet.

My youngest started school in nappies, couldn't use a knife, couldn't consistently follow instructions, attention span of 2 minutes, not conversational, would not even attempt mark making. You can always tell if they've been to nursery, so what would you say about mine?

And why is that a bad thing? At 2 surely it's nice he's been able to develop at his own rate instead of having to grow up to fit into a different environment without the comfort of his mum.

Also you are missing how vastly different girls and boys develop at. My DD is a year ahead of my DS speech at age 1, he went to a childminder and she doesn't

Look I realise you want to feel good about your own decision to put your baby in nursery instead of caring for them yourself but the logic is flawed. Quality of education either at home or the nursery setting is key. My children didn’t attend nursery but were all tri-lingual by the age of 2, a benefit of being at home with a parent who could teach them this. Their other milestones varied but much in the same way friends whose kids were in nursery did. They’re now all high achievers academically but I don’t think this was necessarily because of being at home vs nursery. Do what suits your family but lose the sense of superiority in your choices.

Kids catch up. It isn’t a race to puberty, it’s pretty normal for boys to potty train at 3, and speech can be delayed for many reasons, nursery isn’t a main one.

I was off with my son until he was 3. He was potty trained at 3, had speech difficulties until age 6, now he’s top of his class at 9.

Dont judge people - you’ll soon realise there’s no right way of doing things.

My summer born boys went to school reading and I was a SAHM so ner ner ner ner ner.

Exactly this. For example in Sweden children don't start school until age 7. Much higher standard of living.

It depends on the parents. I never went to nursery, I went to school at 5 , which was usual then. I could read and write and could hold a conversation with an adult- I helped my Mum with her coffee mornings and spoke to everyone who came. I don't remember when I was potty trained- but years before I was 5.

You had me untill you said a bunch of 2 year olds sat nicely and listened and then repeated the task
🤣🤣🤣

What a horrible post.

It's funny because I think the exact opposite. When I'm around institutionalised children it's obvious they don't have 1:1 care. The children who aren't in an institutional environment are generally much more advanced because of how much face to face time they get.

Of course, it evens out as they get older, but for the toddlers who don't benefit much from parent interaction, and for the parents who struggle to engage their toddlers in conversation, I can see that nursery is probably a benefit! No shame in using it.

Judgemental and smug.

I could have said the same about kids who went to nursery, as mine (who didn't) were lightyears ahead academically (could count, say the alphabet and had 100's of words at 14 months, but by 2 knew EVERYTHING)... and more gentle, thoughtful, sweet and well mannered than kids who attended nursery, BUT that sounds smug and judgemental, so I won't.

I think, with kindness, it's probably best not to post such observations on Mumsnet based on one child. Not exactly a conclusive finding...

Sounds like someone is trying to justify working too much and the guilt of dumping their child in nursery. The difference doesnt matter really as they will all learn when they start school at 4

The nurseries where I live are predominantly staffed by very young girls in their late teens, who didnt do well at school. They have too many children to look after and the focus is on activities that work for a big group.

A child at home with a well educated mother or father is often at a better level of development, particularly before age 2-3, after this age social benefits of engagement with peers become more apparent.

Over the last 20 years with more and more children in nurseries, the average age of potty training has risen & fewer children begin school ready to be there. Im not so convinced as you that nurseries are the best place for under 3s.

In your vast experience of one child who would probably have been exactly the same if he had gone to nursery

Post like this are just laughable. Your sample of one case study OP, has made you decide your findings are correct for a whole cohort of non- nursery children? Hopefully you don’t work anywhere that needs any critical thinking.

Obviously all kids are different and that’s fine.
My child was in full time nursery since age 1. Summer born baby. He’d just turned 4 when he started reception and you could clearly see the difference in speech, understanding, confidence and communicating with children and adults even though some of the kids were 6-11 months older than him.
My mum friend at school didn’t go back to work so her child only went to nursery for the 15 hours at age 3 and she’s said numerous times she regrets that and feels her child is disadvantaged for that reason.

Two, really? Kids are all different. Girls are often a bit ahead in these things at that age. Personally, I'd be glad that my child was happy to do their own thing rather than conditioned to sit in a group in that way. I'd be pleased my child is a free spirit. Boys tend to toilet train later than girls. They are only two! I think your expectations are off.

My first, a girl, who didn't go to nursery, was able to read words at 2, knew all colours, including many tertiary and secondary ones by 1.5 years, could write letters. My second was similar. My third needed speech therapy in preschool. I really don't know what I did wrong - oh, wait, they were just individuals who developed on their own timeline.

It's not your superior parenting OP. Or nursery. Your child is just doing what fits for them. Your next child could humble you.

I taught in a F2 / Reception class for several years. This was not the case from what I saw. It was more the development of child themselves as children naturally develop differently (and the quality of whatever care they received - obviously children from homes where neglect was an issue will show but there were some nursery settings that were not ideal too). My daughter was late toilet training - it turned out she had a medical condition and dyspraxia. It certainly wasn't the amount of effort we put in - I can assure you we followed every bit of guidance and probably spent significantly more time than someone parenting a child without a bladder problem.

Tell me you know nothing about child development without telling me you know nothing about child development. children develop at different rates. And what you see as evidence of a more advanced child is not necessarily so. Lots of rote learning and focus on set pieces/routines at nursery, which are in no way indicative of future capabilities. Everything we know about children’s brains tells us they learn best from a place of security and confidence. That their early childhood experiences shape their attainment later on, but it doesn’t matter what set things they can do by age 3.
Children who learn at home may not appear to reach these arbitrary milestones as early, but it doesn’t mean they’re not developing and storing up the skills to be just as good if not better.
I have 3 children. The first went to nursery from age 1. She’s doing well, meets all her targets etc. The second didn’t go until she was 3, she’s working beyond age related expectations, well beyond in some areas. The third went from age 2 (now almost 4) but has very little interest in doing certain things that you’d see as markers for achievement. But his teacher says he’s very bright, curious, determined and a brilliant problem solver - all things that will stand him in great stead as and when he’s ready to put pen to paper etc.

My point is, toddlers will toddle. Stop being so smug and assuming your PLO is any better off than your friend’s.

How's the view from up there on your high horse?! Jeez, judge much?!

I don't know, a lot of mum friends I made when my daughter was born in still close with now and the kids are all 7/8. The differences seemed really obvious at 2, they were all wildly different l, but bit by bit they've all caught up with each other. I think two is way too young to be making those kinds of observations.