EYFS

[PenguinFlip]

I’ve taught in EYFS for many years - always private nurseries. I have 2 children, one with a speech delay.

One nursery (3-4 year olds) I joined about 15 years ago, I was shocked by the amount of formal phonics/reading they had previously been doing. Rather than rock any boats - I continued with their way of teaching which was: a letter and number focus each week, daily name writing practise in a pre cursive script, and reading books starting in the spring term.

15 years later, and I think I would be shot down if any of this was tried in a nursery setting.

However. The nursery class I had 15 years ago were just outstanding. Their behaviour, ability to listen, independence, creativity etc was extremely good.

15 years later : there is a huge focus on independent, self-led learning - and - hand on heart - I don’t think the outcomes are as good. There seems to be a lot of noise, chaos and a feeling that adult led input is ‘wrong’. My role is to scaffold rather than initiate.

In terms of my own children, I supported DD to read and write early. She started with phonics aged 2/3. Rather than cause her harm -DD’s favourite subject at secondary school is English and she is an avid reader. Her creative skills are excellent too. DS has a speech delay, and I purposely held off as I felt he needed a huge amount of phase 1 input. However, despite barely talking he is fascinated by letters and sounds. I’ve started teaching him to read, he loves it - and now his speech is improving as I think seeing/saying the written word is helping his understanding.

My question is : having experienced teaching in a more ‘formal’ structured way in a nursery, compared to informal - I actually thought the outcomes were better with a more ‘adult led’ style which - would be considered very, very ‘wrong’. Similarly - I think my children have benefitted from being taught phonics much earlier than would be considered ‘right’. Am I crazy for making these observations?

I'm not a teacher although I have also worked in childcare and taught eyfs. At my sons school phonics start at 3-4. It's around the time most children are able to sit and concentrate for short periods. Some may do it earlier, some are later. I understand what you are saying, I think a balance works best, so child led but with some linked learning from teachers. So the teacher follows on from the child's interests. Child led learning does encourage the development of imagination and creativity in a way that adult led can not. Where it goes wrong is if it's just a free for all and adults are supervising rather than interacting

It's tricky to compare the two groups, children's experience nowadays compared to 15 years ago is quite different. A lot of children nowadays are on screens more than ever which I think plays its part in children's behaviour.

Plus you can get one nursery class who are calm, independent, willing to learn, and generally seem older than they are, then the next year it's complete chaos in the exact same environment, just a different bunch of kids.

I however love child led play but also love teaching children to read & write 'early' (which is 100% possible with just 5-10 minutes a day) and so think a mix is best. A time for a bit of structure and a time for free play and exploration.

My friend also had a child with a speech delay and as part of his therapy was learning how to pronounce all the individual letter sounds so it went hand in hand with learning to read and so was reading before Reception, even with his speech delay.

DD’s favourite subject at secondary school is English and she is an avid reader. Her creative skills are excellent too.

That's an observation of one child though.

My ds never sat still as a pre-schooler. Never chose to colour / write / mark make before he was about 9 or 10, yet his best subjects at secondary were English and other essay subjects too, and he was very much into his drama and performance. there isn't a correlation between formal teaching pre-school and what subjects they enjoy and are good at in their teens. dc2 was quite keen on mark making and letters before school, yet she ended up not keen on essays or creativity at all.

Totally agree with @Chocoholic900 's post too.

Your sample size of one is just that. For every child you see doing well at reading age 4 I see 3 of them in Y1/2- often summer born boys - totally put off reading and thoroughly bored of phonics because they've had it forced down their throats for 3 years already.

@YomAsalYomBasal

I’d say the sample size is more like 900 as I can’t think of a cohort of children I’ve taught that this wouldn’t apply to.

‘Forcing down throats’ is the issue : and I’d say the issue there is the teacher’s perception. There are so many fun ways to learn and resources available. There is no reason why learning to read shouldn’t be enjoyable. Unless the teacher finds it boring or is against it, and then - no doubt - so will the class.

I’ve taught Year 2 - in a special measures school. Their attitude to reading was heavily improved by good positive teaching. They didn’t ‘hate’ reading. They needed to learn the skills in order to read - which hadn’t been taught sufficiently well in previous years.

I can give my sample size of 1 perspective. DS (summer born) went to the pre-school of a private school before moving to state for reception. In the pre-school he learned one letter per week as OP described. I thought it was too much at the time although DS didn't have any issue and really enjoyed that year. Over the summer holidays he started reading CVC words off his own bat and started reception able to blend and very secure with letter sounds. Fast forward nearly another year and I am shocked at the phonics level reception kids are expected to achieve from a standing start. At the parent's introduction meetings last September the school said they will need to cover more than ever before this year because of revised Yr1 expectations? Not an expert in this area so not sure how that works. Anyways I am now so grateful for what was achieved in pre-school as my DS has breezed through reception phonics and is reading really well. And importantly feeling confident about it. I don't necessarily agree with pushing kids at a young age the way UK schools do but this is the system we are in so we have to manage it for our kids the best we can. Bottom line no regrets about the academic pre-school and I would choose to follow the same route again.

I agree with OP, I think what is expected of children now is very different from what was expected a decade ago. When we were touring nurseries for our DC I remember going to one school that said they were not Montessori or child-led because children needed to learn how to sit still and listen as they were skills they would need in school and in life. That was the nursery we chose but I do find it very ironic that so many private nurseries are Montessori now because it was originally an education model for poor children who didn’t have many resources.

I don’t think what OP is describing is all work and no play, I do think there is a balance there but I think all child-led or primarily child-led isn’t really as beneficial as people say it is. Plus Montessori play can be used at home compared to a dedicated eyes teacher. I don’t think any nursery is completely academic, my own children had two outdoor breaks a day along with free play and class time.