Children arrive at school incapable of learning

[Brycie]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2222176/Chaotic-homes-creating-children-incapable-learning-says-Gove-Teachers-report-year-olds-nappies-speak-sentences.html I wonder what people think of this. Is this child abuse?

What kind of intervention can be offered? On a school thread the other day one poster was talking about how long it can take to teach a child to ask to be excused for the toilet. It seems nuts not to start intervention earlier. Can these children in danger be identified for special programmes from say age 2? How can a programme be created which "discriminates" against children from better organised families to prevent the Surestart problem (ie being overtaken by the enthusiastic parents who don't really need it as much). There must be lots of social workers here who have an opinion but other people too.

My DS2 is still in nappies. He doesnt speak in sentences and he is in year 1.

Its not always straight forward, and 'blame the parents' hysteria doesnt always work .

This smacks of the one thing I was worried about a Conservative Government, that Inclusion is a dirty word and they want segregation.

My brother wasn't potty trained when he went to school. But he was only just four, and unlike when I went to school, he had to start in the September, or not start at all.

I think if we look at the statistics for untrained children before and after this point in our history, ie the point at which we started sending just turned four year olds to school, we would see a sharp rise in children being untrained.

Then there is the cut funding for special schools. Am I wrong in thinking it used to be a lot easier to get children into special schools? Certainly I remember certain children "disappearing" -children who were much more able than many of the children who attend the same school now.

I am in a unique position, in that there is very little physical or social mobility in this area, and many of the people I was at school with send their children to the same school, as do I.

And interestingly, a lot of the people I went to school with have some sort of low grade behavioural or social problem, and often as a direct result of this, they are unable to cope with working, or mortgages, or debt in general, leading to them living in low priced accommodation and their children receiving free school meals.

And interestingly, problems like asd and ADHD are massively heritable.

So is it very surprising that a higher than average proportion of children on fsm also have some sort of below the radar learning difficulty?

I think interventions targeted at free school dinner children will feel massively discriminatory, but one very clever thing a local church does is target them by making the service available for all, but free to children whose parents are on a low income. The stigma is massively reduced, even though none of the higher income parents take up the service because its more expensive than the bog standard holiday club - unless your child gets free school meals.

Edith I think the language readiness or lack thereof is linked to TVs/DVDs/phones/PCs...families simply talk less.

I can't see that preschools are the problem. The sort of (non)socialising that leads to 'non verbal neuro typical school starters' is really basic. Not leaving the house, not recognising own name, etc. The worse preschool would fill in many of those gaps.

Humancat you may have felt that your son's preschool didn't teach him anything, but he would have had the experiences of turn taking, sitting down to drink, probably not drinking from a bottle at 3, not being in a room with the TV all the time. That's the preparation some children are lacking when they start school.

This isn't a new problem - there were always neglected children sadly. At the moment with the HV development checks and the surestart centres the government is about doing as much as it can IMO. Any more than that and there will be cries of "nanny state!" and such. The problem is that ordinary parents don't want to be checked up on (understandably) but without checking everyone you can't sensibly target any intervention without it looking like you're targeting poorer parents and making out they're automatically bad parents. As it stands surestart centres have created bad feeling by implying that their services are not open to middleclass parents - that they're only for single or low-income parents.

One possible solution is to have a "pre-school check" by an educational psychologist, where the psychologist does basic checks on all 3 year olds as soon as they start preschool to identify those with poor language etc. The problems with that of course are that it would cost an absolute fortune and parents who have nothing to worry about will worry ridiculously.

There are children who arrive at school unable to learn, and it's not because of any sn, it really is because they've been neglected at a low level all their lives. So, their nappies have been changed but nobody bothered taking the nannies away to see what would happen. Food was provided, but nobody showed the child how to use a fork because that's messy and time consuming. The child can use a playstation controller but not a crayon.

I am not joking.

But what are the preschools doing about this? I though ghat the entire purpose of educational funding from three was to address this very issue? Why isn't it working and how can we make it work?

I don't know if an ep would cost a fortune if he/she is only doing basic checks. It could be something students of child psychology do for work experience, yes? And then, if they flag up something unusual or problematic, they could refer on.

You will of course get parents who are "teaching to the test" but is that such a massive issue if a child gets shown how to use a fork and a crayon, and what a toilet is for, even if s/he isn't quite ready to use one? A little bit of teaching to the test does no harm, within reason.

I's all part of the same (annual) debate: is it amount of talking in the home, is it something else (often current fashionable bogeyman) in parenting styles, is it relative poverty, is it poverty of ambition, is it just developmental readiness and we shouldn't send them until they're 7 like the rest of Europe.

What is less clear is whether there is an actual increase in children arriving with difficulties, or if there is a fairly predictable level of those who arrive at school exhibiting certain (countable) signs of non-readiness.

And is there any statistically significant link to non-ready (however defined/counted) children and later SEN diagnosis? Or indeed any strong associations, whether causal or otherwise to any particular social factors?

I think the important thing that just has to be done is for analysis to be carried out to discover what the important links are and whether any are causal, and then there will be the evidence upon which to build effective policies.

Until then I suppose the best option is to continue with the family intervention project, even though it doesn't look as if it is yielding the success Brown claimed for it in its early days.

wordfactory - social mobility has decreased in France very significantly, but that is due to factors later on in the educational process, not in early years. Children who attend école maternelle for three full years generally achieve the (major) milestone of learning to read in CP (the first year of primary school). The issues with school start thereafter as the basic foundations are not laid properly in primary school (so parents need to top up), and the issues of gaps in knowledge "emerge" in secondary school when children who have not been topped up at home are unable to cope with the curriculum.

It is depressing. But I noticed that the children who arrived at dd2's 'nursery attached to primary school' unused to siting up at table, not used to drinking water, only coke etc, were licked into shape ready to learn pretty quickly though; by Easter the class seemed cohesive with no noticeable differences.

The Nursery teacher was notorious though, very much disliked by many of the parents, because she did challenge their poor parenting.

Well, I work in a preschool and the job is becoming more and more difficult.
Children are coming in without many of the very basic skills you would expect a 3 year old to have eg responding to their own name/ answering simple questions. Many have no idea how to wash their hands after toileting and will simply hold their hands out and wait for an adult to do it for them.

It's not all of the children, by any means, but a large percentage seem to be delayed in their development and are more like 2 year olds.

We are finding that we need to teach the children many of the skills that they should have learned at home, prior to starting with us, before we can even begin to start on preparing them for school.

Of course, we take into account possible SN and other relevant points, but it still leaves us with a mountain to climb.

"One possible solution is to have a "pre-school check" by an educational psychologist, where the psychologist does basic checks on all 3 year olds as soon as they start preschool to identify those with poor language etc."

The foundations of language are laid before the age of three. The interventions necessary to catch up language that is delayed for reasons of non-exposure (not organic causes) before the age of three are massive and expensive. Children need a language-rich environment from 0-3 in order to master their mother-tongue properly at 5 and learn to read. Oral language fluency and a rich vocabulary are the key drivers of early reading fluency.

Plenty of children go through the entire education system with quite significant SEN that are ignored. These are children who have a decent level of basic language, can look after themselves fairly well etc but struggle constantly with anything beyond basic academics. For them school is just an incredibly hard slog and they give up in secondary, then go on either to have low paid jobs or get into crime. They don't qualify for any special help, or just very basic help and certainly don't qualify for special school. The world for them is a very very hard place.

The only time I have seen really significant positive change is when "sharp-end" (what they used to be called pre "chaotic") families were in residential support homes getting massive intervention on a long programme.

But that costs a lot - although not as much as a lifetime of crapness costs the state.

Colditz is right. I have a very well educated friend who won't let her son use a fork as "he just makes me do it all....he's better eating with his fingers" and he never has the opportunity to use a crayon or paints as "they''re messy."

Result is that he is always on a screen....he is nearly 3 and can't use cutlery not even a spoon and he can't scribble with a crayon.

His Mother is middle class and well educated. She's just lazy.

The revised Early Years Foundation Stage (0 to 5 Years) which came out in Sept this year has put an emphasis on early intervention. Early Years settings now have to do a statutory development check on 2 years olds coupled, hopefully, with a HV check at the same time. The HV check is voluntary though, and the child needs to be attending a setting in the first place to get the 'check'. Settings can be as brilliant as you like, but the parent has to engage with them and their advice.

Bonsoir yes...but isn't that what the 2 year check is for? An idiot could tell which child was or was not being looked after in all aspects and if they were developing well.

Everyone seems to assume this is about children from low income families. Does anyone have any statistics on this? In my experience there are plenty of children in affluent households who are neglected by parents who would rather switch on a dvd, hand over a laptop etc than engage in conversation or take them to a park.

I think that one thing that would improve early years education in this country would be - state nursery places available for all children. The standard of private nurseries is generally quite low, as resources are limited and most staff have low levels of education, limited understanding of child development and are paid minimum wage - they are not well placed to offer high standards of care. Compare that to state/Sure Start nurseries which are well resourced and have many graduate and highly qualified staff, plus access to speech and language therapists and educational psychologists etc.

I would extend free nursery places 3-6 year olds (from 2 years for deprived families) and start formal schooling from what is now Year 2.

Ah MrsCant beat me to it.

I suspect this issue is more complex than low income/poor education. I think there are a lot of parents who feel v busy and that it is "easier" to do if for the child rather than let them make a mess/learn.

But how many times have we seen threads on MN with well-educated, enthusiastic MNers moaning that they had popped into their local SureStart and made to feel unwelcome because they were not the "right" demographic for their support?

You can't have it both ways.

dysfunction there certainly are middle class/wealthy families who fail to impart the basics on their DC, but their position of advanatge in society seems to make up some of the short fall...they may not meet their potential, but are unlikely to fail absolutely IYSWIM.

I think the friend in question DOES feel very busy dysfuntionalme she's always rushing about doing "things" but not engaging with her child. I have tried to encourage her but to no avail. I reallly don't understand why.....she's a good person...I wonder if shes is depressed? But she does not look it.

Because when you're used to a high paced, interesting life, repeatedly mopping sauce off your walls seems tedious and dull. Because it is. And if you see no good reason not to just spoon feed the kid, or give dry foods to eat with fingers, then that is what you will do.

You need to give your friend a good reason. Such as "wow, he hasn't got very good motor control, has he? Can he use a fork yet?"