Is it compulsory to start them at 5??

[littleraysofsunshine]

Remember a lot will change this year as your Dd develops. She will outgrow the preschool - all her peers will move on in September meaning only 3 yr olds will be left. Did very much outgrew her preschool in the last couple of months too big a fish in too small a pond.
Have you looked at the reception classes - very similar to pre school.
Countries that start later still have kindergarten same as our reception classes.

Dd not did

I wouldn't have had a limited choice of schools. I would have his diagnosis and sent him straight to special school instead of having him suffer and become damaged in mainstream. I'm really angry that I've been given the wrong information now.!

Also I've gone on to give the parents I support the wrong information as well, thinking that information directly from the LEA would have been correct

That's terrible Hurr1cane. You are in England, right??

The new draft school admission code makes clear that parents of summer-born children will have the right to request their child is admitted to reception when they have turned 5, and not to year 1. Admissions authorities will have to consider each case on its merits. However, they can refuse and say admission has to be to the ''usual' age group.

Oh Hurr1cane how awful. Really sorry your LA's incompetence has put you in this position.

OP, if you think 7 is a better school starting age then do come over to the home ed board to learn more about that option. That was how I got into HE: I just felt that four (or even five) wasn't the right age for my dd to start formal full-time education.

In England home education is very straightforward: parents have the freedom to educate according to whatever method suits their children best, including unstructured learning through play. You can use any curriculum you like, or none at all. There are no age-linked targets or required subjects.

It's rather like parenting in general: no one dictates to you about what to feed your child, how to dress her or when to put her to bed. You're the parent and the law assumes you are competent to make these decisions.

Phoenixfrights - Parents already have that right and the DfE issued guidance a little while ago reminding admission authorities that they must consider each case individually rather than simply having a blanket policy. All the draft does is incorporate the existing guidance into the Code.

Interesting Saracen. Will have a think.

The thing I find intimidating is how much bigger the schools are.. The ones I've put her down for are lovely sought after village schools. But the thought of her out in that big playground without me

I'm sure she would be fine. It's just hard making that big step. Especially when were all ready so involved in learning and comfortable at home or parks or playgroups

Okay - my one piece of advice is to separate out how you feel from what is best for your DD.
All my DC started at the normal time in a school with an intake of 60, so 180 in the year. They range from having a similar birthday to your DD to being summer born, so much younger. They all coped fine, even my eldest who went when it was much less play based.
In my experience bigger schools can be better, as they have the money for more adults and there are more opportunities of friends and activities.

It really isn't like when I was at school and you are just chucked into a playground with little or no adult supervision. Teachers do take the social side of school seriously.

But if its not the right thing for you and your DD, home educating is a perfectly valid option, and gives you huge freedom (especially at this age).

prh, yeah, but the 2013 DfE guidance was non-statutory whereas the SAC is statutory in respect of maintained schools.

"my one piece of advice is to separate out how you feel from what is best for your DD"

I hear that sentiment often, with respect to children who are approaching the usual preschool or school age. It sounds peculiar to me. Would you say such a thing to the mum of a newborn, who felt uncomfortable about (for example) leaving her baby with someone else? We usually say that parents' instincts about what their children need are right, that parents know their own children best... when they are babies, anyway. But then the tune changes when the children are older. I wonder why. Do we suddenly lose our parenting instincts when our children are four, so we need to switch off our feelings in order to be strong and do what is right for our kids?

My younger child is eight now, and I still think now that if I have a strong uncomfortable feeling about doing something then that is my instincts speaking, and they are usually right. Yes, I'll consider acting against those instincts, but if there isn't an overwhelming reason to act against them then I'll go with them.

BTW in case anyone thinks I am a helicopter parent, my instincts sometimes tell me to give my children more freedom than other children their age have!

Sometimes we can be very worried about letting go of our DC - when they are perfectly capable, and sometimes champing at the bit for independence. Sometimes of course we are worried because they are just not ready.

I think knowing which it is helps you make a decision.

I have known children who have been held back from things because their parents were nervous, and have either resented it or have learnt to be nervous themselves.

As the parent of 3 DC, the eldest of whom is 18 - I can state I have not always known what is best. I don't believe any parent can.

Reception is just like a slightly more structured nursery.

I have a summer-born DD, she started in a primary school nursery at 3.4 with 25 kids all doing a full 9am - 3.30pm day (and lots including her went on to after-school clubs till 6pm) and they all thrived.

She then went to a primary with a 60 intake and moved 3 weeks later to another primary with a 60 intake. No problems at all.

I would choose a bigger school every time over a small school. DD's year have 40 boys and 20 girls. If she had been in a very small village school and the numbers were skewed like that, she'd probably only have a very few other girls to play with which is not ideal.

Starting later in the year means missing out on a lot of the gentle introduction to phonics with the other children and having to play catch-up which is more pressured. Also missing out on making friends, the xmas plays and all the fun things around that.

Having seen the way Y1 works, I would NEVER want to put a child in the position of starting that without a Reception year first. It would be very, very tough for them unless they have been home-schooled to a standard that they could match their classmates.

You will also be amazed at how much she will grow up this year.

Oh, I agree, mummytime. Parents don't always know what is best for their children. I haven't always known what is best for mine.

I just think a parent has a much better chance of knowing what is best for their own child than is a "system" which states that such-and-such is necessary for a four-year-old's development. Whoever specified it didn't know my individual child. The fact that different countries have such different regimes indicates that there is no consensus on the ideal age at which to start school.

And it always strikes me as odd - annoying even - that whenever a parent considers home educating there is always the implication that she may be doing it for selfish reasons and that she needs to take a hard look at her own motives. In contrast, even when someone quite openly expresses the desire to send her child to school for parent-centred reasons ("I can't wait to get some time to myself" / "He's such hard work and I need a break from him"), her choice is never questioned.

So, it makes sense to me that all educational choices should be put on an equal footing and in the first instance, the parent may as well just go with whatever feels right. It's easy enough to change from one system to another if it turns out to have been a mistake.

I think choosing to HE is a whole different thing from being pro-school education, but wanting to delay the start of school in a system that doesn't have much flexibility.

I was home-schooled for a while as a child, and DH and I have discussed it as a possibility should DD have struggled at school in the ways that we did (socially not academically), but she seems ideally suited to a school environment - for now. I have huge admiration for people who do successfully HE - no easy task.

My friends who have HEd, have pretty much all done it for reasons other than nervousness about their child starting school.
Most have done it because of practical or ideological considerations. A few have had it thrust upon them because of their children struggling with the reality of school or SEN. The most successful have been flexible about if and when their DC opt into school.

"I think choosing to HE is a whole different thing from being pro-school education, but wanting to delay the start of school in a system that doesn't have much flexibility."

Hmm, I have quite a different perspective. This was exactly how I got into home education: I didn't want my older daughter to start school until seven or so, and it never really crossed my mind that I would or could or should keep her out of school any longer than that. It was only once I had got stuck into HE that doing it long-term felt possible. It's the same with lots of people I know. In fact, I don't know many people who do HE with the firm intention of doing it forever. We have a very year-to-year, whatever-suits-the-child-right-now sort of attitude. Home ed does not feel like a commitment to me. It happens that my older dd never did go to school (well, just briefly when she was nine, but I don't know whether you'd count that).

Nor do I find HE hard work: for me it is easier than sending my dd to school, though there were no major problems there. I guess it all depends how you approach it. There are a wide variety of ways to do it, some of which are inherently easier than others. Certainly some of my friends find HE full-on and hard work, especially if they have children whose behaviour is challenging and/or if they work in a very formal school-style way.

Anyway, I'm glad your daughter likes school so much. It's always great when the setting you first try works out and you don't have any serious problems with it!

How do you deal with GCSE's and A levels?

Saracen, would love to know more about your home ed

I'm just unsure what to do. Almost 5 just seems so small still regardless of how adaptable and intelligent they are. School life can change and does change them. I'm in no hurry to rush it all. I remember when my little sister was starting at age five, she changed so much in a short time. Plus we're very involved with our little ones, and not seeing her 9-3 every day will be hard. I know people will see it as selfish, but we let then be who they want, teach them everyday skills, let them explore till their hearts are content, outdoorsy things. I just don't want to rush their growing up process. And from my experience, school does exactly that (aside the positive elements)

pyrrah, GCSEs are problematic for home ed kids because of the need to get coursework validated, so most do IGCSEs instead. They identify an exam centre which will allow them to sit the exam as a private candidate, then prepare themselves through self-study, distance learning, or tutor-led study groups. There is no longer any financial barrier to home educated kids going to college before the age of 16 (they automatically attract full funding just like over-16s), so it may be possible to do some GCSEs there, but the range of subjects offered is limited. There are various alternative qualifications which some kids do, and a few young people go straight to A-levels or into work without any previous qualifications at all.

I am less familiar with doing A levels through home education. I know it is possible to do them independently, as with IGCSEs, but it seems that only a minority of HE teens do that. I don't know why that is. Most (previously) HE kids go to college for them.

But of course in the case of the OP, I'd say that the answer to "How do you deal with GCSEs and A levels?" is that you wait about nine years and then start looking at your options! School is always an option if the other options don't seem appealing. I only know a few HE kids who've gone to school at 14 because of not wanting to do exams independently, but the educational landscape may be radically altered by the time littleraysofsunshine's child is a teenager! Who can say what will be possible or advisable then?

I think that "almost 5 just seems so small" really must depend on the child and parents. My DD is 4.2 and would love to be in reception. She is a strong, independent child who enjoys both free play and structured activities. She is really keen to move onto school and I don't think she would have particularly struggled if she had gone this year.

Almost 5 seeming small is also a cultural thing. While there are lots of places in the world where institutional schooling starts later, there are also loads where children of 5 have historically had very circumscribed existences and responsibilities we would boggle at.

To pluck an example from not that far from home, Swiss rural kids walk to school unaccompanied from 5. And another... the gypsy kids near us are out with their dads doing work in the holidays from around age 6.

I realise this is an old thread but i just wanted to comment in case it helps other parents. It is possible (although not always easy) to get agreement from your LEA (or preferred school if they are their own admissions authority) for your child to start in Reception class at age 5.

It is illegal for the admissions authority to have a blanket policy of insisting children that start school at compulsory school age (i.e. the term following their 5th birthday) have to go straight into Year 1. The authority must look at the circumstances of each case and should make a decision based on what is best for the child.

This is particularly relevant for summer born children who can be only just 4 when they are able (not compelled) to start school. There's a lot of work being done by various concerned groups around this issue at the moment. The education system at the moment finds itself in the bizarre situation of frequently penalising children who start school at compulsory start age (5) by insisting they are placed in Year 1, which I personally fail to see can be in their best interests. It will be interesting to see how attitudes to this change in the coming years.