Summer-born children starting school. Latest parliamentary research briefings.

[Gruach]

I have no personal interest in this - not even an informed opinion.

But this research briefing just appeared in my email inbox so I thought I'd share it.

Apologies if it's been done to death already.

motherbare.co.uk/jedi-writing-and-mark-making-laboritory/

Jedi writing and other child friendly ideas

I'm arguing against your assertion that it makes no difference whether they're in nursery or reception mrz. At all nurseries and receptions I've seen it is a big difference; you've yet to convince me it isn't in yours.

I think you may be seeing it very differently from me in that many of your kids aren't learning until they start school, whether that's nursery or reception. My DS was in nursery before the preschool year too, he had oodles of EYFS. And in any case he did and does learn more at home than at school. Being as we can go at his own pace and 1:1, whereas the teachers have to cater for 30 kids at various different stages and cover a fixed syllabus in a fixed time.

Which brings me to my other bone of contention, that they are taught at their own pace. I'll believe that when DD's taught advanced phonics in nursery.

If the nursery and reception staff are following the statutory curriculum there is no difference between two years in nursery and two years in reception. The child is the same child with the same level of development and the same needs which should be met by whichever setting they are in. One of the four themes of EYFS is the Unique Child

It's interesting that you say you don't like the implication that the nursery didn't plan appropriately yet say you have no faith in them planning at an appropriate level for your daughter ... Strange ????

Yes, but they don't get two years in reception do they? Once they start reception that means year 1 next year. So once they start reception they're pushed to make sure they can read and write by the end of it. That's why and how reception is different from nursery if you like.

Not to mention some children haven't yet gone to nursery anyway, so should those children be allowed to defer/spend two years in reception?

Well she'll be in a completely different setting for a start. Also, nurseries are completely designed and set up for teaching fine motor skills - they're not designed or set up for teaching year 1 phonics.

If they aren't set up they need to get some training

Théy get one year in nursery and one year in reception ...one plus one equals two years in EYFS

Or some will have one year of EYFS if they don't go to nursery; or 3 if they get free 2 yr old provision; or 4+ if they go to daycare or a childminder. But luckily most children don't only start progressing at their own pace when they hit EYFS. Mostly they'll have progressed at their own pace for - well, between 4 and 5 years when they start reception. With an arbitrary cutoff on the 1st of September. Hence this whole discussion.

And some will have five if they are in child care from birth
pages (for Ed Supplier sites)/PennyTassonisPracticalEYFSHandbook-PuttingThemesintoPractice.pdf

There isn't a cut off there is a choice

mrz, without a choice about when they start year 1 or year 7, a choice about when they start reception is of very limited use as has been repeatedly pointed out on this thread. And around we go again...

YY baffled, that's how it looks to me too. Sounds like your son is on very much the same page as mine was. All the more frustrating if he's so close to the boundary.

And in some settings they follow EYFS and teach according to the child's individual needs regardless

And around again because parents have the right to request that their child is taught out of year, so reception rather than Y1 and for their child to continue to be taught out of year.
It also happens that children are taught outside their year group as a short term measure ...

I think we've just gone so far around you ended up on the same side as me mrz.

I'm not on any side Catkind ... I'm only interested in the facts

That's twice we've agreed in the same thread

And I missed it both times ????

My happy 9 year old has just found out that he "should" have been going into year 6 not year 5 this term. His cubs leaders challenged him at summer camp! It's never been an issue at school and he isn't bothered.

Tiggytape/Reallytired - this reports sounds dangerously sensible! Are people beginning to apply proper judgment, do you think? It almost makes you wonder whether years of debating and campaigning might just have been worthwhile :). It would be good to have less yoyoing.

We need health professionals to be trained to know the options and "spot" the right candidate children at an early stage ie the 21/2 -3 window. The kids for whom deferral is an answer tend only to benefit if their mums are powerful advocates at the moment.