Learning to read at 4/5 or later?

[Pico2]

This is just out of curiosity. Looking at children in reception, some learn to read really quickly and others after 2 terms are still struggling with the one letter sounds. I know that many countries start formal learning later. Is there any evidence (for reading English) that those children who will spend the next couple of years struggling would do better or worse if they started at 7?

Hopefully they learn something between 4 and 7. I've not seen a struggling group being taught, but I'd find it stressful learning something I found that hard and I wonder if the gain from starting early is worth that.

Also, is there some sort of 'readiness' that comes at different ages for different children, or would those not ready at 4 still not be ready at 7 without some sort of intervention?

In a way, I think that's what Gove was attempting to implement, except with harder objectives. Although fewer of them.

Somehow, it seems to have gone badly wrong.

It Could be argued that longer holidays can result in the "summer slump" as to winding down before a holiday that's down to individual schools and certainly not universal. My class had normal lessons yesterday

Yes I agree that's true mrz. But shorter learning days + winding down days means some school children in England is very much disadvantaged compared to other countries, yet government seems to aim higher by giving them higher goal to achieve.

As I said winding down days is a problem of individual schools and nothing to do with the school system.

Ds didn't "get" it until he was 6.5. I'd spent P1 saying he wasn't blending - just learning the books off by heart because he's bright. School was relaxed about it because they said some kids, especially boys, are just not developmentally ready until they're 6. They did however give him 6 weeks 1:1 support from the depute head at the beginning of P2 before moving him down to the middle reading group.

By the time he left primary school, he was back in the "top" group and free reading. He's now 15, in the top set for English and on course to get an A for his Nat 5 English (Scottish equivalent of GCSE).

Anecdotal but apposite.

Don't know if it's relevant but he was also very late to talk understandably (as was I). Spoke fluent Serbo-Croation it sounded like until he was 3 . I was also very good at English trounced the Dux who won every single other subject prize in S5

I know, mrz. Can you whisper name of the school you teach? I will move house.

Prettybird- would you or your DS have preferred that he started learning to read later? Did he gain from the early time before he 'got it'?

I'm relaxed about the time he has at school before he did finally learn to read - but only because he was at an excellent and nurturing school.

As he was a September baby, I'd always known that technically I had the option of deferring him and only starting school the following year - although usually only January/February (and a few November/December) born kids choose to defer. I'd have also had to pay for nursery for the extra year.

But by Scottish norms he was "ready" and I was happy for him to start school.

Reading was only a small part of what they did in P1 (and even P2) and they never pressurised him.