Strange question but if you knew you'd move schools after 2 years would you bother at all ?

[Hideehi]

My nieces are going to a private school which starts them at 7, the youngest has two older sisters already there and it's a fore gone conclusion she'll get in, is there any point in my sister sending her to the local state primary for 2 years ?

question is what else is she going to do - legally she'd have to formally home ed from 5.

FWIW (to answer your thead title) I probably would.

i guess she would home ed, just hardly seems worth the trouble of getting her all settled knowing they are going to move her.

2 years is a long enough time to make friends and make a good start to education. Given infant schools are often just for 3 years anyway I don't really see why she wouldn't send them to the primary?

Although she'll make some friends and then ahve to leave them I still think it would be worth he beginning to get the feel for school etc.

Don't know about Home Ed, but I'd always kind of assumed that it's something you're completely 'into' for most of the duration of their schooling - not something just to dip in and out of. Personally I think it must be very difficult and requires a serious amount of preparation, commitment, and the right skills and attitude?

Some children have to move schools, for various different reasons - in 2 years many things might change. Both for the parents and the child.

My DD1 had 1 year in Reception - then we moved far out of the area. She then had a year in private school and then 1 year in state infant school. She is still in the same school but in the Juniors now. She is a happy child.

So to answer your question "no" it would not bother us as a family to change.

My 6 and 5 year olds are in their 3rd school this year, due to moving house twice. It hasn't really been a problem, they have been happy at all 3 schools and I don't think it's affected how quickly they've learnt things as all 3 schools have been following the same curriculum.

Bit of a shock if they turn up unable to read or write I would have thought!

Seriously, I would suggest contacting the school and seeing where their chidlren tedn to go before hand. If a school starts at 7 that typically measn Year 3, so infact they would have usually had 3 years at infant school beforehand (Reception and Years 1 and 2).

If it's the norm at that school to start at 7 then why send them somewhere else first? What did the others do? I would be inclined to home ed the younger one until she starts with her sisters. Education starts far too early in this country IMO, and remember you don't have to "formally" home ed, the legal obligation is to "provide an education that is appropriate to age and ability". If you take a close look at what kids do in the early years it's really very easy to show (if you have to) that you are providing them with an appropriate education.

Snowy - whilst many schools are primary, so go from rising 5s through to 11, others are still split into infants and juniors. Just because your child is going to a junior school doesn't mean that they simply skip infant school.

Wouldn't it be 3 years ie. Reception to year 2. A lot of private schools take entry at 7+ , ds joined then as class sizes expanded from preprep . Even our local state infants schools move on to juniors then so it is a natural age to change even where that system is inconsistent.

Many preps don't have a preprep and children would attend their local infants. The years between 5 and 7 are hugely important. I moved my DD1 from state primary at 7 to prep school but it was not the original plan - it became obvious that it would be the best place for her as time went by. She learnt a huge amount at the state school both educationally and socially. I do not think there is so much difference between the younger children in state and private. I think the differences become more apparent later. I think the learning to be independent and used to being out at school is invaluable. It is always good to have out of school friends too.