Supportive but not pushy mum

[Blossom8]

My daughter is 2 years and 9 months and she can count and order numbers 1-50, loves stories, knows her alphabets, recognises around 45 words, knows her shapes, colours and can manage to do jigsaws for ages 2-6 year olds. She enjoys doing the above. She also gets plenty of "fun" time too which I feel is very important to get the right balance. We are off to the London Aquarium next week and I am booking tickets for her to see In the Night Garden at the O2.

So why am I needing opinions? After reading various threads on mumsnet, I'm concerned that by being "supportive" and "encouraging" of my daugther to know the academic stuff, I don't want her later on to resent studying. I just want to give her a good foundation with a interest in learning. Also I'm in a dilemma as to whether to send her to a private primary school. I have nothing against state schools but the ones near me are not that great and I don't want her to be "bored" and not challenged because she already knows the stuff.

I've read alot on here to say parents sending their kids to private are snobbish etc but I am far from snobbish, I had a state education, earn an average salary but would rather spend my hard earned cash on helping my child fulfill her potential.

Do you not think you can instil a work ethic when HE or develop the skill of working, sharing, and getting on with others through sport, Beavers or other activities

OP, you have just described both my DDs at that age - they are now 9 and 11 and honestly the state education system has done very well for them. Their primary school has been very well able to differentiate for children coming into Reception already able to read, understand number bonds and so on - the school has consistently kept both my DDs working at their level without damaging their social integration into the group. This process has continued for DD1 in Middle School. I haven't had to play the pushy parent more than twice in all the years that my DDs have been at school, the rest of the time their needs have been anticipated and catered for. They have not been bored, they have been stretched, worked to their potential and they are flourishing, all in our normal state schools.

OK, so I read to them every night and they have more books at home than they know what to do with. We go to museums and nature reserves, we talk about everything together and yes, that has probably contributed to how they're doing. However, the bottom line is that the schools my DDs have attended have appreciated our support and we have appreciated theirs. Don't rule out the state sector before you start...

Pointythings - are your children at a faith state schools as generally they are better, in discipline I believe anyway? How is the school rated by Ofsted and in their SATs results? I know some state schools varies quite considerably depending on the location. I would not hesitate for one moment to send my child there if there was an excellent state school near where I live.

Blossom8 - my dss' school isn't a faith school and it has been excellent at catering for my dss' needs and abilities. And not just their academic needs and abilities, either. I genuinely do not think my children would be as well adjusted and self-confident if it weren't for their school. It feels like a real community, which it is a pleasure to be part of.

mrz - no, I don't think I can, personally. I think it helps if a parent understands their limitations.

The evidence indicates that children develop a work ethic in the home

OP, DD2 is at a C of E school, but they take only 10% of their intake on church attendance, no priority given beyond that. They have a very mixed intake - our town has some leafy bits but some very deprived bits also. When I sent DD1 there, they were rated 'Satisfactory' and I ignored that because they clearly had aspirations for their children to achieve the maximum and because there was a warm, welcoming feel about the school. No SATs results at KS 2 as we are 3-tier (in the last year, changing next year)

We have two primaries, they are both much the same (currently both rated 'Good') and two Middle Schools (currently both rated 'Satisfactory', due to close in July) and one High School (currently rated 'Good').

I chose my children's schools based on gut feeling and on my confidence in my ability to keep my children working at the top of their game - they are both clever, DD1 predicted high L5 in maths and science, possible L6 in English, DD2 in Yr 4, predicted 4B in maths, 5C in reading and writing). It's very much a partnership - I have to acknowledge that my DDs' teachers have 30 children to deal with every day so are limited in what they can do but they give it their best and that's good. I also have to acknowledge that I have my part to do at home in terms of keeping them flying - that's my job as a parent too.

Lastly, I'd be very wary of ruling out any school but an 'Outstanding' school - I've seen enough on here from parents of children in schools which were anything but 'Outstanding' in real terms, no matter what OFSTED said. Sometimes that rating says a lot more about a school's ability to tick boxes than about what it's actually doing - you have to do a lot of research as a parent.

All I know is that I put my faith in the schools that felt right to me and in my own ability as a parent (and DH's of course) to do the best for our children.

mrz - exactly, very well put. Where children are taught in the home that you need hard work to get somewhere, they will thrive, even in a school that isn't necessary the cream of the cream. I'd also like to add that individual teachers can have a huge influence on a child even within a school that is not ideal overall. My DDs have had some amazing teachers over their years in school, people who have delivered so much more than the basics for all the children in their care.

Oh, yes, I have the work ethic... I was thinking more of the sharing and getting on with others when one of my dss has a diagnosis aspergers. I felt a bit battered and bruised attempting to help my ds1 learn to get on effectively with others, and terrified that he would be bullied and misunderstood at school, but the school helped him feel so safe, respected and liked that he is doing just fine, now, and has lots of friends. I won't forget that in a hurry - it could have been so very different.

Sorry for the long post but I was in a similar situation and also have DS1 in state school and DS2 in independant pre-school.

My DS was very advanced at 2 and taught himself most things (not as advanced as yours Blossom though). He is at a very small state infant school , he was in a class of 15 in Year R and is now in a class of 20 in Y1. To some extent I think all schools are able to provide individual support for all children but maybe not as much as in a private school as often the classes are just too big. Also discipline is VERY different in many private schools to state school.

I am shocked Learnandsay that you feel you need to be doing so much educational stuff at home for your DC at home at such a young age but maybe you have given the wrong impression of what you do and maybe you are just going along with what DC wants to do?

My DS is still doing really well and is achieving a year above his age all ronud, when he started in YR he started on a Y2 reading level and has continued to progress well and has been assessed as an overall 2a in Literacy a few weeks ago so is well above average but not exceptional (according to MN as many children are level 4 at this age apparently!). His reading age for just words is 10 1/2 so nearly double his age but obviously there is difference with his comprehension - something people often forget with their DC!

I do still have thoughts about what his achievements could be if he was in private school as for instance his current school spend lots of time getting children to the average level (ie 1:1) but no time with the higher achievers as they do not need to. In a private school there should be a lot of individual work, in fact when we looked round they showed me the bottom child's reading book and the top child's reading book in a Y1 class of 16 boys and they were 'years' apart. One was still a very basic reading book, the other was Harry Potter! The other thing is the variety of work- ie lots of sports, music and languages from the age of 4 so a good rounded education.

I left it too late to get DS1 into the independant school at infant level as we wanted to be sure we could afford it right through to 16 but he starts there for Juniors. DS2 is already in the pre-school and starts the infants in September.

Some of the other private schools in the area are snobby and ridiculously expensive, the one we have chosen is non-selective, very family orientated, less expensive and small. We are happy at the state infant school at the moment but the HT left this year and a new one has not been appointed yet so things may change.

Same advice as the others though, look around, ask lots of questions, some schools 'dislike' bright children, I have experienced it myself, with my DS and also with other peoples DC. Bright children (and their parents) can be a 'nuisance' to some teachers whereas other teachers love having a good variety of abilities in their class! I don't think a G&T programme is essential in schools necessarily as good schools should be able to differentiate well!

Also, don't forget you can always leave the basic literacy and numeracy to school and broaden your child's learning with things like chess, languages, musical instruments or something likedrama/dance!

I hope you find somewhere suitable!

I too taught my dd quite a bit before she went to school. I still do. She is now in year 4 and just as enthusiasic as ever for learning and school.

Without parental input no child would even learn to speak English, let alone read or do maths. No child learns by themselves. It is just a question for each parent to decide on a balance which they think is right.
With classes of up to 35, I am too beginning to question state education, if a child is out of the usual range of attainment for their age.
Good luck Blossom8 with whatever you decide.

Your daughter sounds bright but not gifted or out of the ordinary, just normal. I know quite a few little girls who could do the same at a similar age. Girls tend to 'get there' with alot of that stuff before boys, but I have noticed that the boys catch up by 3.5. You are worrying alot about something you don't need to and don't make the mistake of choosing schooling on the basis of how a school caters for advanced kids. Children change all the time and she may well end up performing (gasp) averagely later on. Not trying to rain on your parade, just telling you to relax and see what happens.

Actually richmal all hearing children will naturally learn to speak the language they hear in the home without any real effort from parents as it is an innate knowledge, and yes children can and do learn many things by themselves.

I absolutely agree with what dilys4trevor said and would also recommend not choosing schooling on this basis at this stage. It is very true that a lot of little girls with very supportive parents do seem exceptionally advanced in reception - and quite a few tend to "level out" as others catch up. So I would try and step back a little, if you can.

I would say boys catch up certainly by the end of KS1 if not earlier.

All schools have to follow the EYFS in reception so you will experience a degree of frustration if you expect your DD to be doing advanced literacy and maths in reception - even in a private school they will generally be focusing on all areas of the EYFS and they are extensive - have a look it makes interesting reading and it will set expectations. I have researched private schools extensively but came to the conclusion that certain in KS1 the difference wasn't that great in most cases.

All schools have to follow EYFS but that doesn't prevent them from teaching more advanced literacy and numeracy skills if the child is working at a higher level.

In my experience, k there are normally about 10 children who start primary knowing their alphabet, counting and reading-ish. Some fluently and some are ready to take off.

There are many who are not interested in the slightest about these academic things but are kind hearted, a joy for your child to play with and who might bring her a tissue if she were upset.

I think there is a rather skewed focus on 'academic' intelligence. There will be children in the class who are far more advanced in terms of emotional intelligence.

IMHE, obviously in a very different area, we rarely have any children start school knowing the alphabet, counting (although some can recite number names ) or reading or writing their name. They all move onto the next class able to do so however.

learnandsay I think it completely depends on the school, the teacher and the class your child will be in. Both of my DC were reading before starting school. DS (now 7) I taught to read because he was interested in it and TBH at the time I thought it was a good 'trick' to show people. DD (5 in reception) was taught by DS. DS was also ahead of expected levels in maths.

DS had a horrific reception year. The class he was in was awful, teachers kept coming and going, by the end of the year he'd had 6 different teachers and had stalled with his learning. He'd completely switched off. Yr1 was slightly better for him but, again had a pretty diabolical teacher who just left him to it because he was beyond what was expected. I didn't do anything about it though because I didn't want to be labelled pushy. Move to yr2 this year and his maths is excelling again, he's reading ahead of expected levels (whatever they are at this age). We're still working on catching his writing up but he's not behind which is fine with me.

DD on the other hand has an absolutely fantastic teacher in reception this year. She's constantly being encouraged to try the next thing. She's reading and comprehending chapter books (Roald Dahl being the current favourite), she's writing stories and working on punctuation, creativity etc.

Don't just assume they wont do as good a job as you otherwise you will be a very unhappy parent who will spend the next few years stressing about things that, to be honest, don't really matter that much at this age. As someone once said on here which put me in my place 'they wont be writing on their CV that they could read before starting school or that they could count to 100 at the age of 2'!!

IME very bright children don't get bored. The ones that struggle get bored as they find itr hard work & it doesn't make sense to them.If a child is reading Lord of the rings & understanding it then reception should offer the opportunities for them to act out their favourite parts, to write a story in the style of the book, to make models of Gandolf etc etc. Similarly with maths, they're off seeing the patterns in numbers & working out times tables etc for themselves while the others are adding two sets together. A good reception teacher will see & encourage this & give them other challenges. But at the end of the day a 5 year old only has 5 years of experience of the world no matter how bright they are & has a lot to learn!!!

I think parents of bright children worry more about it than the children tbh.

I totally agree RedHelenB

"Actually richmal all hearing children will naturally learn to speak the language they hear in the home without any real effort from parents ..."
mrz, actually I was thinking of the thankfully infrequent cases where babies have grown up in the wild and not acquired language. Admittedly children do pick up language from hearing those around them, which I would argue is input .

When it comes to, for instance, a two year old teaching themselves to read; in some families they will have been read to more often with words being spelt out, or been given a computerised toy which teaches alphabets. If they can read they must have had some help other than being given a book and told to work it out themselves.
It is then just a question of degree as to how much help a child gets. I find it hard to believe that by coincidence those going to private school get better results because they have innate ability.
mrz I just want to add I too think you make some excellent points, but wouldn't life be boring if we all thought the same on every issue?

Not all hearing children naturally learn to speak a language just by hearing it spoken, any more than all moving children naturally learn how to move efficiently just by watching others and experimenting themselves. Some children need active tuition to help them learn to speak, move about or manipulate things effectively. And some children don't need active, deliberate tuition to help them learn to read - sometimes sharing an awful lot of books and an alphabet jigsaw puzzle is enough, which doesn't seem to me any more like deliberate tuition than talking to your child about the world around them and finding out that they have learnt to speak.

Unless, of course, you can be accused of sharing unnatural interests with your offspring.