Opinions wanted. Infant primary or primary junior for educationally advanced kid?

[Athena404]

There is a lovely little school near me I'm thinking of sending my child to. Trouble is it's just an infant primary (ie only until year 2). I'm not sure if this will cause an issue as recently his Paediatrician assessed him as being 2 years educationally advanced from his corrected age which would mean 3 school years. There is a primary junior close but it definitely doesn't seem as good or nice. But I don't know if that would be better for him. Has anyone gone through this before? What would you suggest?

I could understand a paediatrician saying child is developmentally two years ahead it the "educationally advanced" I find very odd. I've never received an Ed Psychs report that uses that term either.

as recently his Paediatrician assessed him as being 2 years educationally advanced from his corrected age which would mean 3 school years.

It might help if you come back and explain this to folk please OP. Paediatricians are not known for their knowledge of the Primary Curriculum.
From the 'corrected age' comment, is your ds prem ?

Who he become friends with got nothing to do with how educationally advanced he is, unless you choose his friends.

Look at EYFS. "Educationally" at that age also includes things like being able to follow the rules of a game, holding 2 way conversations, vocabulary, knowledge of the world, role play. Relative ability in those things makes a big difference to friendships. Not much fun to play games with people who don't understand the rules and won't take turns. And when it comes to interests, DD's are often centred on what she's reading. She's in seventh heaven when she finds other children who like the same books and will talk about or role play them with her.

Also academically having some academic peers is a huge boost. Definitely something to be wished for I think.

"Not much fun to play games with people who don't understand the rules" it's a great skill to learn how to explain the rules to someone who doesn't know the rules whether you're three or ninety three or to negotiate new rules with your playmates.

That would be my guess too

cat I do get what you're saying but I think that's an issue for some outliers dependent on personality rather than a child who is just a bit ahead. And even that group don't normally struggle in the first years of primary because they are still young children who enjoy normal things in addition to anything else they are capable of.

it's a great skill to learn how to explain the rules to someone who doesn't know the rules whether you're three or ninety three or to negotiate new rules with your playmates

I said don't understand the rules, not don't know the rules. It's not as simple as explain the rules and then play happily, lots of DD's peers hadn't got the concept of taking turns at the start of reception, or refused to go down the snake if they landed at the top of it. Of course DD would rather play with someone who can also play the game, not someone who will walk off in a huff unless allowed to cheat so they win. How could that be fun for her? Of course she'd rather play shops with another child who wants to play shops, not the child who just wants to throw the toy money around.

Miaw Mrz

Or she could have had a full Paediatric developmental assessment. In which case it's still irrelevant!

2 years educationally advanced from his corrected age which would mean 3 school years.

So your child is within the normal range then!

Really OP, in my DC's Y1 class there were children with reading / spelling ages of 4/5 and children with a reading age of 12. So that's a range of Reception to Y8! Granted, they were not equally able in every other subject area (but somehow I am doubting that your DC has covered the whole syllabus for every subject, though please excuse me if this is the case.).

"Or she could have had a full Paediatric developmental assessment. In which case it's still irrelevant" she could however it wouldn't reveal if her child was "educationally advanced" only if they were developmentally advanced in some all areas.

cat none of dd's classmates could play chess in reception (or infact at any point in primary) and I agree it wasn't as simple as her just explaining the rules. So she just played in the sandpit with them, or played cowboys, or any of a thousand things they did have in common. I also don't think the going off in a huff behaviour is an ability and understanding thing, more of a pfb one.

Mrz

she could however it wouldn't reveal if her child was "educationally advanced" only if they were developmentally advanced in some all areas.

That's what I was trying to say Mrz I don't think I phrased it very well.

I don't understand people not believing his doctor but anyway. She explained it to me as him being what they expect an average child just about just about to start year 2 to be. Oh and it wasn't just her but I'm not going to go in to my son's medical history. I do know that the infant primary has a sister junior school but it is on the other side of town. Do you think they would share resources?

Athena it's because paeds don't really have much knowledge about primary school education standards, the two don't really cross over. I think that's why people, including myself, were asking.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/education/3014283-how-do-i-stop-my-little-man-form-doing-things-backwards

In your shoes I would a) visit both schools and get a feel for them; b) ask about how they differentiate work and what they have by way of support for gifted and talented children; c) ask about extra curricula stuff (children who are academically advanced sometimes particularly benefit from doing things like drama, because it can push them out of their comfort zone in a helpful way rather than everything coming to them easily).

If all of this stuff was similar at both schools, I would go for the bigger school, simply because IME larger schools have more resources, more children (so a greater chance of there being a cohort of children that do the advanced maths, or whatever, rather than him being the only one) and a wider range of other stuff to challenge and help him develop all round

athena it's honestly not the case that people don't believe a child could be 2yrs ahead of average. It's the assessment people are questioning. And in addition to what titanz said, it's also because it's not usual to take children that are well within the normal ability range for educational assessment.

cat none of dd's classmates could play chess in reception (or infact at any point in primary) and I agree it wasn't as simple as her just explaining the rules. So she just played in the sandpit with them, or played cowboys, or any of a thousand things they did have in common. I also don't think the going off in a huff behaviour is an ability and understanding thing, more of a pfb one.

I think what I'm talking about is the ability to understand and communicate complex ideas. Which obviously correlates to academic ability. It's involved in all areas of play, not just a specific game. For a child who's communicating at a complex level, another child who can understand and respond at the same level tends to be more fun. The role play can be more involved, they can learn or make up rules to a new game, they can set up a joint project in the sandpit not just each dig a hole then wander off.

I see DD's play really take off when she's with slightly older also bright kids. It makes me a bit sad for her when I compare with the way she plays with friends in her own class. Though she is a happy little thing, she's maybe not in her element, often in a bit of a big sister role.

It would probably help if she was into football or something where there's less talking! And it will probably help when more of the kids really get the reading bug.

OP, did you read the posts about how 4-11 education is organised? It's just you're still talking about an "infant primary", but there's no such thing.

Olennas thanks, I think that's what I'll do, I hadn't even considered the extra curricular stuff.

sub I don't care if you call it something different where you live

OP if you are in England, no one calls an infant school "infant primary" and no one calls a primary school "primary junior". Well maybe just you. I know it seems unimportant but it confused a lot of people at first, that's all.

I agree with others, look round both schools, ask them what they will do to help stretch your child, and see which one you think will suit him best.

If you do go for the infant school, I would check out which junior school the students mostly go to - sounds like there isn't an attached one next door (my DC went to an infant and junior school basically on the same site, tho totally separate schools) so how far away is the junior school?

Of course you can switch at year 3 to a standard primary but that can cause problems with getting a place, plus most children will have been there from yr R so it's perhaps not ideal.

"sub I don't care if you call it something different where you live"

I think it's same everywhere in England.

And no body is saying they don't believe your child is as advanced as you say.
My ds had full paed developmental assessment at age 2, it mentions his performance skills are above average, along with details like recognising letters/numbers/colours/shapes/solving puzzles, etc. But it doesn't say anything about him being x years ahead etc. I think that's what people are saying about.
But you may have had different kind of assessment, so pp's are asking what kind of assessment they were, I think.