Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Education

Join the discussion on our Education forum.

Flip

Original poster

URGENT! Have to talk on RAdio 5 about whether we send kids to school too early

21 replies

Carrie (mumsnet) · 31/08/2004 11:07

Ploughing through trying to find old threads because I know we've debated this more than once - but have to leave in an hour to talk about whther UK sends kids to school too early. I have my own thoughts but would like to add some thoughts from mumsnetters if I get chance - anyone any opinions?

Leaving house at 12 noon.....

Thanks

OP posts:

aloha · 31/08/2004 11:11

Hate the thought of my son going to school at four - so v pleased that he is a September baby and will go at fiveish. I do think we start formal education too early. Sadly though, it's the only free childcare working parents get (aside from the risible 2/5 hours a day) so most of us sort of look foward to it. More free nursery provision and more nursery like care for five year olds instead of lessons would be a good idea IMO. I think lots of children are simply not ABLE to sit still and work at five and are, IMO, at risk of being labelled at SEN or simply as bad or disruptive because of this, whereas a start of formal teaching at six or seven, would, I think, help prevent this.

Wallace · 31/08/2004 11:15

We start later in Scotland. Children are usually between 4.5 and 5.5. Also you can chose to sart child the next year instead if they are still four when the term starts in August.

Philly · 31/08/2004 11:16

I think that it is appalling taht we send them so early,especially foer boys,all atht sitting still etc they need to be running around and using their imaginations.My ds2 was not at all ready at 4 adn we have spent 3 years trying to get over the sense of failure he felt at not being able to get his pencil to do what he wanted it to!

I am not aginst some form of education at this age but not full time and not formal reading and writing but more developing social skills ,problem solving and lots adn lots of fun.

Could write a lot on this but have to go but will listen out for you,what time are you on

ks · 31/08/2004 11:17

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Galaxy · 31/08/2004 11:18

message withdrawn

roisin · 31/08/2004 11:18

Yes we do send them too early.

My ds2 is born in May. He has been in school full-time for the past year, with the walk to school this involves being out of the house 8.30 am - 3.45 pm every day. He has come home from school absolutely shattered every day and basically crashes out. Despite our efforts to keep him going, on a school day is invariably in bed by 6 pm, and asleep by 6.03! He loves school, but during the week has no other life, not even time to play with his toys. All he has time to do at home is eat and sleep.

DS1 is also a summer baby, but fortunately did not start school until after he was 5. But he was still similarly tired throughout year 1.

I would prefer a system where children don't start formal schooling until age 6 minimum, and then only half days. (With of course adequate additional provision of play-based childcare for working parents).

bundle · 31/08/2004 11:18

i went at 3 and loved it, gave me access to reading/writing which i think i craved even at an early age. dd1 is 4, and her school has two intakes so she'll go after christmas, which for me is perfect (she's at nursery with dd2, who's 16 mths and them being together is logistically great) - i think she'll be ready then, and her nursery experience will stand her in good stead. the whole academic year thing is a headache and doesn't really take into account the differing needs of children who are up to a year apart.

roisin · 31/08/2004 11:21

At the end of summer I gave ds2's teacher a gift and a card thanking her for the excellent year, but also mentioning "I still don't agree that full-time school is the best place for these 4 yr-olds". After school she came out specially to thank me, and to tell me that she completely agreed with my point of view!

Galaxy · 31/08/2004 11:23

message withdrawn

lucysmum · 31/08/2004 11:33

MY DD was 4 last week and starts school next week, full time. I think she is ready for it - more so than some of her friends, particularly the boys, who are some months older. So it all depends on the child - we should be more flexible about putting the child in the school year that is best for them, not using age as the basis for everything. This can happen at some smaller primary schools in the UK where there are mixed year group classes - this allows children of different ages to progress at their own pace without the annual move up to the next class. There was an interesting discussio on this topic on Radio 4 a couple of weeks ago. A headmaster's son with a 31 August birthday had a gap year after his GSCEs as in his parents' view, the social/emotional differences for a child that was young in their year were greater that the intellectual ones and this was more acute in teenagers than young children.

Avalon · 31/08/2004 11:40

I agree with others that some sort of structured play would be better to start and then perhaps formal schooling at 6. Intake time also impacts hugely on kids.
My dd3 is a May baby and I know you don't have to send them to school until the term after they're 5, but the school put a lot of pressure on me to send her at 'the normal time'. Otherwise, Mrs X, she will be 'behind everyone else'. The majority of the class is older than dd3 and it does show. She's doing ok at school but was a reluctant starter at reading and, of course, she is compared to her class group in terms of what she 'should' be achieving.

berries · 31/08/2004 11:46

When I started school (back in the dim & distant past), very few started before 5. I would like to know whether the change in girls out performing boys corresponds tothe change in starting school earlier & earlier as I think it is definately harder on boys.
BTW, I had one dd start at 4 & 11 months, & 1 start at 4 & 1 month. Older child def. found it much easier to fit in on the social side, not just academic.

susanmt · 31/08/2004 11:47

Totallt think we put them too early in general. My dd could have started last week in Scotland (at 4.5) but we have chosen not to send her. As I see her running around the garden in the afternoon I know I have made the right decision! If anywhere in the UK had a kindergarten, learning through play approach to the early yeats then I think it would be ok, but we formalise education way too early. I did some work on this for my MEd and ther scandinavians start formally at 7, and by 10 are outperforming children in this country in most skills PLUS they are all speaking English as well.

As a secondary teacher in Scotland I can tell the difference in first year between those who went at 4.5 and 5.5, especially boys. Older children make the transition much more smoothly.

I am of the opinion that in this country children start school so young as a response to no government providing proper childcare/nursery education. If there was good childcare provision for working parents more people would feel able to object to formal education at 4.

All my children will go at 5.5, and I am delighted with this plan.

Hope you get on OK!!

SenoraPostrophe · 31/08/2004 11:50

You might be interested to know that in Spain kids start school at 3. OK, it's not compulsory (but almost everyone does it), but it's at the school and for school hours (which is 9am -2pm here - they have a short break for "breakfast" and go home for lunch at 2).

My friend's daughter started last year - I was talking to her about it - I worry about them being pushed too hard at this age. But she said in the first term they did circles and the number 1. Not takling it too fast then!

Good luck with the radio talk!

hmb · 31/08/2004 12:31

Too late to be helpful, but it very much depends on the child. Dd was more than ready for full time school at 3.5, ds is not as ready as I would like at 4.5.

Also depends on the school, and how well they cope with the range of 'readyness' in reception

Fio2 · 31/08/2004 12:37

I have to add, although too late also, that schooling for special needs children (well alot of them ) should start early. Early intervention with children with SEN is often a very good thing. Where we used to live they took children from 2 at the special schools. My daughter was 3 when she started and bloomed there. i know it doesnt suit everyone but it suited us and she is so bored at home because we have moved to an area that doesnt really do early intervention. Just thought i would add that!

There are lots of articles on early intervention for SEN but i dont know where they are

hmb · 31/08/2004 12:47

For that matter any children who are slower to reach milestones can be helped by the right sort of early schooling. My son is NT, but was slow to speak and this was affecting his behaviour. The nursery that he went to was very 'on the ball' and put in some structure play and SALT for him. His report this year says that he is unrecognisable as te little boy who started the year and they are quite correct.

The Key thing is getting the level of 'education' that your child needs at the time. Not easy with reception classes of up to 30.

Fio2 · 31/08/2004 12:53

glad he is doing so well hmb

hmb · 31/08/2004 13:01

Thanks Fio2, it has made a vast difference to him. He is still on the slower side of normal, IYSWIM, but he can now interact with other children, and we have far fewer outbursts of violent temper. He still has the attention span of a gnat (he is only little after all!) and doesn't like to 'join in' unless it is an activity of his choice anyway, but the school is very gently woring on these things. Without their input I hate to think how he would be by now.

They have the ability to do this as they have bery small class sizes. Something that all of our children need, but sadly don't all get

coppertop · 31/08/2004 13:32

As a June baby ds1 will be one of the youngest in his class when he starts school next week. The only real concern I have is his limited self-help skills, although he has really made lots of progress during the summer holidays. I think he will really benefit from this relatively early start. School will give his day a far better structure than anything that I could arrange at home. He loves anything to do with letters, numbers, science and computers. From an SEN point of view he should also get a lot more help than he currently has, eg at the moment he has 45mins of SALT per month. At school he should get that same amount in a week. He will also have access to more help with his sensory problems. His pre-school were fantastic but he was only there for 2.5hrs a day.

In an ideal world I would love to see a system where children started school when they were ready to rather than because of their age.

Original poster

Carrie (mumsnet) · 31/08/2004 20:03

Thanks ot one and all - what a great response

Don't think I quite did justice to your views so apologies for that!

Thanks again though

OP posts:

Flip