Discussion - School is NOT beneficial to young children at all!

[shappyred]

The UK education system is antiquated and damaging to children. Formal learning would ideally begin from age 7-8, until then, children need free-play, social time and lots of outdoor time.

What are the best alternatives to this? Home Ed? Forest school? Also, it's very clear that parent/child attachment becomes strained and kids become peer attached at school, this is wrong on all levels!

What type of provision could work better? Private schooling it seems isn't much better.

A play based provision from 5-8 year olds?

I'm very interested in this subject..

It can be the same here. Some primaries don't do much homework bar reading

My kids all love school and have thrived there. But yes I'd love more outdoor, play based learning, especially as they get older as the education system starts off with a lot of play here in Ireland anyway. I notice my 12 year old who is in her last year of primary school doesn't get time in the school garden anymore, the nature walks have been dropped.
But overall most children seem happy at school. It is definitely a one size fits most system though. Our school doesn't have an attendance problem but some kids find it harder than others.

@shappyred not being snarky but do you have younger children? 7-8 year olds are very much ready for formal learning and I definitely do not think a play based approach until 8 is going to suit the upper age range.

Reception is brilliant- I’ve loved the experience both of my children had. Their teachers were so creative and everyone loves it. I do however think year 1 transition is too much for many children and it seems to be where behaviour issues start. I’d be up for year 1 being much more like reception and year 2 being the transition year to formal learning instead. The expectations seem to be quite high though but y3/4 still seem quite fun and year 6 just seems a bit joyless.

IMO school is fine up until about Y2 - then it accelerates so rapidly and becomes really tough for young minds who still need a lot of play and movement. For me it's not about age but removing play based learning too early

well said

Do you actually teach year 2?

very powerful and I wholeheartedly agree.

if only, it refers to influence by peers and lack of by parents at a time when children need adult guidance and ideation.. peer attachment can come in later years, we are talking for younger kids.. it has little benefit but can harm..

I’d go a step further and say school in general is not beneficial for all children regardless of age. As shown on this thread and on MN in. general, school suits some kids but does not suit most. This is also true in my experience as an ex primary teacher. In my professional opinion school suits about 10-20% of children. This has been true in the classes/schools I’ve taught in.

For my own DC the light went out in their eyes after Reception class which was mostly a good experience for them. If only children older than 5 were allowed to learn through play! Anyways I took mine out to unschool them so they do learn through play.

Unfortunately this issue is worse than it’s ever been as the curriculum demands get ever greater and the system becomes more and more out of step with the modern world.

Absolutely. For anyone who has not read it, may I suggest,

“Hold On to Your Kids, Why Parents Need to Matter More than Peers”, by Gordon Neufeld and Gabor Mate,

a wonderful book.

A huge benefit I can see to a primary independent education here is that one day a week right through until prep (secondary age) is outdoor learning through forest school. I think the removal of play based learning in year 2 is less well known that the move to greater structure in year 1.

For your child, perhaps, but it worked well for mine. I taught them as much at home via their homework as they learned in school, it was a beneficial prompt for learning at home.

It depends on the child.

Ds, a summer boy with ADHD, ASD and glue ear hated reception. He couldn't hear what was doing on and the noise/activity round him were dreadful for his sensory issues. He was on edge the whole time.
Year 1 when they sat down and worked and desks more with a routine (not entirely but some) was much better.

This thread is great and I am following with interest but also sadness at my own powerlessness here. My daughter started reception this year. Many would say she’s thriving. She’s grasped reading with both hands. The teachers say she’s a joy, well behaved, engaged, learning fast, making friends, ‘thriving’ some may say. At home she is a behavioural nightmare, major meltdowns, lashing out, hitting, spitting, ignoring us, demand avoidance, sleep issues. I am absolutely sure that 5 days is too much for her. But what can I do? Quite frankly we need the free childcare that school provides and I need the break from parenting, I would never cope with home ed. Ideally I would send her three days but that’s not an option. It’s very sad. Does the ‘Hold onto your kids’ book just criticise the system or does it actually help you to make things better despite the system? I don’t feel like I need to read a book to convince me that the system is not good for my child but if it might help then I am up for reading it!

At age 8, able readers should start Latin with specialist teachers. An additional Romance, Scandinavian, or Germanic language could be started at 9. Learning Latin improves student spelling and grammar.
On the other hand, Y7 students at Y4 or below English SPAG and comprehensive skills should not start another language. It will be hard enough teaching them functional English skills without confusing the issue.

I think it varies from school to school. My son's school has changed a lot in the past ten years. I'm a Governor and on my last visit the early years lead explained how phonics (which starts in reception ) is basically repeatedly reciting the sounds every day until memorised. And in order to ensure kids are ready for the following school year they now start teaching reception curriculum in spring term of nursery. Year 1 curriculum in spring term of reception and so on. So the formal learning is starting for some kids at 4.5 years old. I would not send my child to that school now.

Disagree with you OP. Both my dc were ready for formal learning by the end of reception, both were reading in nursery as are many other children. They are like sponges at this age absorbing information.

OP - you are speaking from a point of privilege, you are imagining all homes are safe and comfortable, all parents are caring and able to support learning at home. The sad truth is that for many children school is their safest and happiest place, that’s why sure start / pre schools were / are so good - the earlier these children are in the system the better. Data shows that the earlier children from deprived backgrounds start preschool the better.
And many children are excited to start school, want to learn to read and enjoy the free play eyfs.

Disagree with you. My child was very happy with play based learning in nursery and reception and the gradual move to more formal learning in Year 1. I don't think start of school from reception at the age of 4 is bad. It has definitely benefited my child.