uk -age child starts school-could we find a better way?

[mam29]

Wondered with so many posts about

advantages being oldest
disadvantages being youngest
scottish system being different so same arguments but different months of the year.
other countries not starting formal schooling until age 6/7
4does seem young and most las have one intake

why do we start so early?

I have a feb child whos middle i guess.
my middle dd is september and just missed a school year.
Another mum today asked me ohh you going to get her into school year early I said its near impossible.

system allows kids to defer but not move forward a year.
dh is 31st august and feels it was harder.
Im july and not sure had any bearing on how I did.

Also in dds class some of the youngest doing better academically than the middle age group in class.

I think early years practice could be extended into Y1 as there's a big differencw and younger Y1s can struggle. As an F2 teacher I don't keep children in at 'playtimes' but then they 'play' all day. I just facilitate and direct that play. Teachers do plan but it's not usually table work. Sadly I do know of some schools where even in F1 children have very formal lessons but it's not the norm ime

i have read comments on mumsnet of children being kept in at break, just because you dont do it does not mean it does not happen.
why do you direct there play, it is there play, they know what they understand and what they want to explore, this is the point, children do not need a adult to direct them.
just because the work does not happen at a table, it is still happening, all sat round a white bored, all sat on the rug together, whatever is being used it is not the childs choice, and i take issue with anyone saying that they do have a choice.
they cannot even play the way they want as there play is directed.

i have read comments on mumsnet of children being kept in at break, just because you dont do it does not mean it does not happen.
why do you direct there play, it is there play, they know what they understand and what they want to explore, this is the point, children do not need a adult to direct them.
just because the work does not happen at a table, it is still happening, all sat round a white bored, all sat on the rug together, whatever is being used it is not the childs choice, and i take issue with anyone saying that they do have a choice.
they cannot even play the way they want as there play is directed.

I agree that extension of the Reception ethos into Year one/early Year two would be a much better approach.

I know that lots of schools handle the transition between YR and Y1 really well, keeping a play-based approach for a good while, unfortunately my dd's school doesn't believe in transition and adopts a 'start as we mean to go on' approach.

Dd has just turned 5 and is really struggling with this approach. She can't understand why she has to "work, work, work" and doesn't understand why they can't play anymore. I agree with her.

Children start school so early in this country because it is very cheap childcare. Whether or not a child is ready for school is almost irrelevant.

When i say I 'direct play' I mean if they are playing shops, i'll model language, provide paper and demonstrate writing shopping lists or price tags. This actually makes their play more fun, they still enjoy it and initiate it but i've expanded their knowledge and vocab and potential learning

in that case you have a different understanding of the word Direct then i do.
many children will see language being demonstrated in a real shop.
providing paper hardly needs a school environment and how do you know they would not have heard that word at the weekend.
and like i said, it is there play, the paper could just be left out.
the play has been initiated by what the school has seen fit to provide.
what would you do if the game was tree climbing, running around outside in the rain "washing" clothes, making mud pies.
i would suggest that what you do is control the play, keep it educational, not just let them run with it.

"Children start school so early in this country because it is very cheap childcare."

It isn't cheap though. You would expect it to be, with the poor adult-to-child ratio and crowded conditions and all. But if you look at government expenditure per child per hour spent in school, it isn't any cheaper than sending the child to a childminder. As childcare goes, school is not particularly cost-effective.

And since school isn't providing cheap childcare, early schooling can only be justified if there is some educational benefit to children.

... or do you mean that state school is cheap for parents? If that is its only virtue, why not divert the money to provide childcare subsidies instead?

Actually apart from the tree climbing we do all the other things you've mentioned and more. You'd be amazed at the lack of experiences many children have. I'm sure you take your dcs to the shops, train station, beach etc but many have never been and lack the knowledge needed to role-play. I see my direction as a way of expanding and extending their prior knowledge, providing equipment/tools/props to enhance play and correct misconceptions. Don't you play with your dcs at home? They learn from you and enjoy adult imteraction. The only difference is i plan in that i think through where the play might lead. My early years planning is very ffluid and flexible.

*fluid

The whole experience of starting school at 4 or 5 is very stressful and unsettling for both children and parents, especially if they need breakfast clubs, after-school care, holiday care etc.

I stayed in the safety of my day nursery until I was 7 and went to school fully independent and eager to learn. I still remember how happy and proud I was on my first day at school. For my son it will be just a scary blur. And honestly, I can't see any advantages of starting so early. Many of my friends, who couldn't put two letters together at 7, have now PhDs from top Universities around the world and are doing very well. No troubles with reading or writing at all.

I'm overseas and DS would - if in the UK - be starting school now. It's odd to see via Facebook his peers from my NCT group doing just that. I am in two minds about it; on the one hand he seems so little, on the other, worried he will fall behind. This thread has been quite reassuring!

School costs around £5k per annum. Childcare would be much more. It's an economic decision imo

But kids in kindergarten in Europe are not learning in a way English kids have to. They hardly look at letters or numbers durin their kindergarten time. Some start school aged 6/7 being able to read, but many can't and they are absolutely not expected to.

In addition to the early school start, many English parents seem terrified of their kids falling behind and the literacy schemes, clubs 'educational ' toys and puzzles is depressing.

I have a 4 yr old dd who would have just started school. She has a cousin who started school last year, and a younger cousin who will start school next year. In fact her younger cousin will start school a year before her! My niece had to learn her alphabet before she started school, aged 4, an they rushes her through the reading programme - in reception. So much for learning through play . My niece hates reading and after a year can still barely struggle through a v basic book (kicking and screaming).

In contrast my 3 dc started school almost 3 years after their cousin. We're raring to go. And after the first year of being taught to read could read books like Enid blytons adventure series. Ds 1 read lord of the rings half way through his first year of school. My boy are all v fluent readers, way ahead of their chronological age, and I do put a large part of it down to the later start and the better teaching.obviously, having a family environment trying to encourage reading and a natural propensity helps, but ds3 for example reads very very well but unlike his brothers isnr an avid reader. I shake my head in despair at my dn experience. If other countries can accomodate flexibility, like deferring start for a year, ( and i mean a year, not 5 a who's talking anout having clasea apanning 4-11 years why can't England manage it? And if kids did actually start school later, there would e fewer who needed to or would benefit from deferring in the first place, costhey would be ready!

My 4 year old just started P1 and she loves it.

I don't think she would benefit at all from two more years of not being at school.

She has a good teacher and it is a play based curriculum.

She's only in until 12.15 every day and is already asking to stay longer.

I think people just enjoy the idea that everything on "the Continent" is better and people on "the Continent" are more sophisticated.

DH and I both learnt to read at 3, before we started school. It was hardly a cruelty.

I agree that there is too much rigidity in the system, but it is too rigid both ways. I live in an area where nurseries have been told that if they teach children to read they will lose their early years funding. I understand that not every child is ready to read at this stage she spent the entire year before school angry and frustrated at not being able to read. I didn't do it myself as a dyslexic I had a terrible time learning to read and didn't want to get it wrong with my DD.

A lot of schools in Scotland are changing. It involves building schools very open plan, so all children of all ages can "learn" together. Classrooms don't have doors, there are enough teachers around. Children have a board that they look at, they have activities they do every day and they choose them off he board. It's a much more relaxed approach to learning. My DS is thriving in his environment as he feels in control of his learning I think.

Hmmm.

Whilst I can the attraction of some DC starting later, I simply don't think there woiuld be parental will across the board.

Especially as private school would still begin at rising five and parents would worry that those DC were getting a head start .

If you look at the comparative information available for what is done, where, and at what age, you will find it is all much of a muchness. It is just done in a different setting, but at roughly the same age.

Children "in Europe" tend to start later but many will have had a solid 3years of state nursery school with qualified teachers and most will be able to read and write before starting primary.

I think the gaping hole in the UK system is at nursery level. Friends of mine in Germany, France, Belgium, Spain, Italy and Portugal are astounded in the first instance that children in the UK start primary so young,but then understand when I explain that the first year or so of primary are very much taken up with the basic skills that most European children will have done at nursery.

Maybe the big problem is inconsistancy between schools/teachers. My class is run as wordfactory describes with children choosing areas to learn in apart from a few sessions like PE, phonics, circle time. Some teachers/schools haven't grasped the child initiated learning and perhaps aren't suited to early years. Schools seemto think teachers need to teach a different age every few years. Maybe if they allowed early years enthusiasts to remain in early years teaching would be more play based.

I agree with extending foundation into Y1 but also think if you delayed the school starting age, more children would go to a private nursery or childminder (and pay). Firstly for childcare but also because parents want their children to learnand many are 'ready' for it.

Thinking " the Europeans" are more sophisticated ? what sort of point is that??

Having taught in he English school system, having been through it myself, and having dn in English schools now, I can base my views on something more concrete than how sophisticated I honk other Europeans might be!

And having had kids in kindergarten and school in 2 different central European countries, I can 100% state that hey don't do things at around the same time. My poor 4 year old dn was dragged kicking and screaming through her reception year reading programme while my 4 , 5 and 6 yr old dc learnt social skills, play, rules, getting on I. Groups, so when they started school they were mature enough, old enough etc to really get down to work and it was a much smoother ride for the kids.

But yes, all kids are different and ready at different ages, but that is what is totally lacking in the English system at all - flexibility to take the children's needs I to account and defer a year. The people this would help after all are the youngest ones. Why not co wider it? Other countries do.

My experience of the Maternelle/Kindergarten system is only positive. 99% of Belgian children attend, starting from 2.5 yo. Primary - and therefore formal learning - starts in the year they turn 6. My dd was 6.5.

As reddwarf says above, they cover the social aspects of school without formal lessons. Using the toilet, concentration for increasing periods, having lunch, making friends, getting gradually used to a structured day etc All whilst learning through play/exploration and starting to look at numbers and letters/write their name etc

By the time they have turned 6, most of them have "evened out" somwhat be they the eldest, or youngest in the class and are READY to get on with formal learning - without the worry of being away from Mum for the first time or being in a strange enviroment. My dd went from zilch to free reading in 1st primary - as did all her friends. She could read a little in English before that, but we never pushed it.

well I'm in norway
here kids start school at the end of august of the calender year they turn 6, so between 5years 8 months and 6 years 8 months. kindergarten is not compulsory but is almost universal at least from age 3.

Certainly some children start school reading and writing but it isn't the 'norm'. The national kindergarten framework explicitly states that kindergarten isn't school, so whilst there are many activities that are academically stimulating there is no expectation or monitoring of 'learning' in an academic sense.

There is a big focus on experience and development and on engaging with a childs curiosity (a least in the good kindergartens) and on things like speaking and listening.

DD1 was 'only' 5 years 8 months when she started school but I'm really glad she didn't start any earlier because although she was ready to learn academically (could read etc.) a year earlier she grew so much as a person from a year of climbing mountains, painting pictures, dissecting fish, building campfires and cooking their own meals, picking berries, doing drama, making music, going skiing etc.

Now she's been doing all thouse things (and more) since starting school too, but the balance of school is leaning towards the academic whereas the balance of kidergarten was more even. For DD she learned alot about perserverence and 'practice makes perfect' and that success is not neccessarily measured by being the 'best'. Yes, she did enjoy being 'best' in preschool activities, but she also mastered being most definitely not the fastest on skis without becoming disheartened.

I generally think kids are best placed to mature and develop those skills, and to an extent their social skills, in an environment that is not focussed on targets, grading and ultimataly ranking them. Although reception in the UK is 'play based' learning it is certainly not free of targets, grading (EYFS points) or ranking (groups, book bands etc,), and whilst these things might go over the childrens heads parents are aware and I suspect that filters down....

I kept my children out of school until 6 years, 7 for eldest and they doing brilliantly. You do not need to follow curriculum for home ed and the wide education created through free learning is great.