Gordon Brown is grabbing at PR straws

[AtheneNoctua]

I thought the key to social mobility was education. Wouldn't his my money would be better spend on the (failing) education system?

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7468506.stm

Perhaps I'm a cynic, but this program sounds as if it will cost a lot of money and won't actually achieve its intended purpose. But, rather will serve as a quick PR scam for Gordon Brown.

I think the issue is that these parents tend to fail to take up the offer of services offered to them and their children.

But then the worrying thing for me would be whether it got to a point where you might be deemed a 'bad' parent simply because you didn't take up these services.

Unless I misunderstand this is an incentive to parents to access certain services in childrens centres. It doesn't say anywhere that what is meant is that you have to put your 2 year-old into FT childcare or are we reading different articles? I think the problem is that middle-class parents tend to be a bit better at accessing services available to them. I think this is one of the greatest benefits from education actually. The confidence and ability to access information and opportunities both for yourself and your children. That is not the same as thick vs. clever.

This is exactly my concern. Already the fact that free nursery places are offered for 3 and 4 year olds means it is assumed that you should make use of them, even though school starts at 5. So you're a bad parent if you don't?

I think parents have every right not to work and not to feel guilty about it while their children are still young. For me, this is all a push in the wrong direction.

I don't actually disagree with the idea of free nursery places per se, but it is the reasoning behind it that leaves me cold. Taking responsibility from parents and putting it in the hands of the state is not a good idea.

I think they pay 200 pounds to parents who access services - I don't really have a problem with this, although I'm not sure it's the best way to spend money. There are some excellent services out there, although I'd disagree that they only attract middle classes. The charity group I attend with DD is certainly not middle class.

The stand alone sentence that nursery would be made free for disadvantaged families bothers me.

I also think that the purely economic reasoning for wanting both parents to work does not tell the whole story.

So how do we improve social mobility? I think nurseries is probably one of the greatest ways to give all children more of an equal start in life. Probably because I am Scandinavian and I see it has worked very well in Scandinavia. Actually, I was speaking to a teacher-friend from Sweden the other day who told me that there are lots of immigrants-children from fairly poor areas in her school and there is a great concern that their mothers often don't send them to nursery and they really end up struggling at school. Immigrant children from poor backgrounds who do attend nursery start school at a much similar level as Swedish children. Of course I have no statistics, but I think its interesting.

What age do they start nursery in Sweden?

Around 18 months.

How do they do it in Sweden

Some of the comments are interesting, too. I don't think our nurseries are quite like the Swedish ones.

To me that seems young to start formally educating children. They are still babies really.

Info on Swedish Education System. It seems that compulsory education in Sweden is 7-16 according to this site.

margoandjerry

I'm so hoping that GB's plan would to be to make part-time attendance at a suitable nursery facility part of the deal, I don't much care what the parents spend the money on although I would hope that we wouldn't be exacerbating any drinking/drug taking/partying tendancies which could have a negative impact on the childrens' home
lives.

Surestart used a lot of government funding and a proportion of the section of society it was aimed at just didn't take up the facilities on offer. Middle class parents took up some of the resulting spare capacity because it was intended to be available to those in the locality, and if you were local but middle class you were still eligible and it would have been good to get a more varied social mix anyway.

Maybe instead of additional "lump sum" carrots we could offer a higher rate of child benefit to those who use such nursery facilities.

I would dearly like to see all children arrive for their first day at school having had the benefits that time spent in a good nursery can offer. I'm not saying that parents alone can't stimulate their child, play with them, ensure that they have a good meal or 2 each day but some children don't have parents who are capable of this and by the time it becomes apparent that they have been affected by such a deficit in their life it is too late to reverse a lot of the impact particularly as the deficit may continue throughout their school life with schools just having to make allowances for these children and the impact they have on class-life as a whole not to mention the additional resources required in some cases.

I realise that many people resent the school system being expected to become a social welfare facility too but school attendance is compulsory, not many 4/5 year olds start off their school life by truanting so it is an ideal way into the "child-in-need"'s life to make up for poor quality home life.

"higher rate of child benefit to those who use such nursery facilities".

So parents who choose not to use nursery facilities because they don't think it's in the best interest of their child would be penalised with the lower rate cb?

Juule, nursery in Sweden is not compulsory, but most parents use them because its virtually unheard of to be a sahm. The nurseries we have used in the UK definatly match the Swedish nurseries, but I think the standard in is varied.

Agree lower rate of cb is a really bad idea. I don't think nurseries makes that much of a difference to the average child. I think it makes a difference in the group of children this initiative is targeting though.

You need to look at what parents from lower socio-economic groups are less likely to provide for their children in order to crack down on the differences and you need to do it early on in a child's life.

It is not formal education at 18 months!

From juuule's first link:
"On the face of it, Sweden's attitude to teaching nursery children is incredibly relaxed and informal. There is little structured learning, play is paramount, there are few locks or security coded gates and children are encouraged to help with cleaning and catering.

Most Swedish children who leave pre-school at the age of six cannot read or write. Yet within three years of starting formal schooling at the age of seven, these children lead the literacy tables in Europe."

QueenMeabhOfConnaught, I know. I am Swedish. I went to nursery in Sweden myself. Of course it is not formal education as such, but they do have a learning plan just like they do here in the UK.