Children should not start school until they are 7 - discuss...

[CountessDracula]

article here

My dd is almost 5 and gagging to go to school tbh!

dd2 seems a bit "younger" than dd1 was (although only by amonth) at 4.5 to go into reception, but tbh is a bit beyond nursery now. i went at 3

My 2 are early birthdays - I firmly believe DD1 was ready - DD2 (starts Sep) I think could delay a year tbh (not that we will).

One size does not fit all.

I mean it's a very individual thing isn't it? So much depending upon the character, personality and maturity of the child.

I don't think dd1 is ready, she will be 5 in October but is very shy. Then again, school could bring her out of her shell (but do they need 'bringing out of their shell'?)

dd2 will turn 4 on the 27th August next year and then be at school a week or so later, which is a bit

hopefully we will be in Australia by then and they don't have to officially start until the year they turn 6.6yrs

depends on the child is my sitting on the fence answer

mine play outside virtually everyday (weather permitting) and they are already at nursery (they are 2.8, started at 0.5), so i think different circumstances apply - that article saying that kids should not go to school til they are 7 cos then they get more time to play outside - does she mean that the sahp should not go back to work til they are 7? Not sure she is being very realistic

Ds2 has been begging for ages to be allowed to go to school. He will be starting in September at just over 4.5yrs. Ds1 was 4yrs 2mths and really could have done with an extra year at pre-school. Even so, I think 7 would be going too far.

Where is the balance?

I strongly suspect that these 'Handwriting lessons at 16 months' merely means scribbling with a wax crayon - should we not allow this? And ' Learning basic maths with rhymes' - isn't this just 'One, two, buckle my shoe'?

Just because a child is not ready at 4 years and two days doesn't mean they won't be ready 6 months later - why the urge to wait until 7?

My 4 year old starts this year, he is badgering the LIFE out of me about maths, he YEARNS for structure.

I think it is more to do with parental attitudes than the age they start school - the right tyope of pushy parent can whip their child up into a frenzy of anxiety without the help of any school.

Hmm.

Well, DD1 is SN, so I'll be keeping her back.

They push you here to put them in school.

She will only be 5 on 19 June 2008 and with her delays I don't see the point in putting her in until she's 6.

I do think overall they rather rush things here.

Two here who were more than ready (oldest and youngest in their years). One who is only just mastering spelling at age 10 due to dyslexia and would have benefited from more time 'just to be' before having to struggle in a formal setting. But we didn't know that at age 5, so would not have kept him back anyway.

FWIW, my ex grew up in Germany and didn't start formal education till he was 7. He's very intelligent, with advanced degree in geophysics and successful.

As a working parent my mind would be reeling at the prospect of full childcare costs until children are almost 7.

Given that too many children can't read very well when they leave school, I'd only be happy with this sort of proposal if childcare was funded fully by the government (for working parents) between the current school starting age and the increased starting age and if you had to reach a certain level of attainment before being allowed to actually leave at 16.

I think it is too rigid here. If they are young for the year you should have the option of holding them back.

Yet another decision taken out of parents' hands...

Oh God yes, the thought of ds1 pestering me for another 2-3 years in respect of "when can I go to the school mummy ?" doesn't bear thinking about.

EscapeFrom has it exactly right - I am a volunteer in the playgroup sector and the writing and maths 'teaching' are just as she says, lots of opportunities and different materials for mark-making, lots of counting activities and opportunities to explore concepts like 'more than' or 'less than', the sandpit is a great resource for this for example. There really is no question of 'handwriting lessons' or 'teaching children to read at 3'. And the 'marks' staff give to children are just observation sheets, recording that the staff have actually observed that a child can do something. If we don't observe it, that's fine too, often children do very different things at home and at playgroup.

I also don't think we are usually comparing like with like when we discuss education in different countries. In some countries the pre-school sector is actually quite formal, but all we hear is that they 'don't start school' until they are 6 or 7. We have had children from Europe and the US join our primary school before they had started formal schooling in their home countries. And yet they had actually done very similar things to our reception stage and sometimes had more formal structures into the bargain.

I think you'll still have some saying when their child reaches 7 that they are too immature, parlty becasue they have been allowed to be in a less disciplined environment for longer and agree in some countries Kindergarten or whatever system precedes "School" can be more formal than it is depicted in the media. In countries with a later formal start date than UK they can also reserve the option to hold children back a year (so you could have a child of almost 9 before starting among a class of 7 year olds), run a parallel class rather like our old Remedial system to whittle out from moainstream those who don't "fit" but aren't officially SN and may have a ruthless 11+ system which dictates the child's future potential. Funnily you only hear about the "success" stories

It seems to me the article is a little inconsistent (although I don't have any experience of the primary education system just yet - except my own obviously!) in saying that children should not start school in order to allow more time to play outside / learn social skills. Surely there is an equally reasonable case for arguing that if we are failing our children in these areas schools should provide greater opportunities for structured play / social interaction and outdoor pursuits for children of this age?

[smug]

i agree sort of. i think reception should be from age 6 but optional so you could start school in year 1 aged 7.

oh and you'd have nursery from 3 - 6 that was government funded so the childcare cost wouldn't be an issue.

ds will be 4 and 2 weeks when he starts school and way too young.

ds1 is 7 and loves school and loves learning and being with his pals so.....

Here you are really encouraged to keep the kids at home, dd2 went at age 5 1/2, she was desperate to go but not her decision, could have gone at 4 and a half, she didnt miss out, was reading in sentances by the time she got to school and much more confident tha n her peers. When we lived down south there was very little flexibility and dd1 had to start at just 4 and it knocked the stuffing out of her, i say keep them at home as long as you can regardless of ability.

Agree, totally.

FWIW We (dh and I) grew up in South Africa, you only start school at 7 (a reception year at age 6) but we continue to go to school until we're 18. Children leaves school much more mature, and ready to go to uni etc. They have a better chance to find decent work and emotionally a lot of children are not ready to go to school age 4. (away from home, mum, dad etc.)

Also our school system works half days only. You start at around 8am and finish 1:30pm to go home. Afternoon is dedicated to sport and other clubs!

I agree with a lot of the article and what others have said. But I think some people could read it to mean no education until the child turns 7, rathew than no school until 7. I believe children need pre-school experience to learn how to exist away from parents/take turns/mix with other children from differing backgrounds/build confidence in ways which they wouldn't necessarily at home.
However I don't htink that a class of 30 children with one teacher and one assistant is necessarily the best environment for the majority of under 7's. I was a teacher BC and I used to feel so sad for those children who patently weren't ready for formal schooling and spent their days in a slightly baffled manner wandering from table to table trying to work out what was expected of them when really they should have been playing freely. My dd starts in Sept aged just 4. Fortunately only part time,as she still naps most days. God knows how she will survive physically although academically she is probaby fairly ready.
Sorry - where did that come from?! Touched a nerve...

I think there should be more flexibility for individual children to go when they are reday. There is too much prescription and no chance to be different.

IMO the Scottish system is much better where children stay at 'nursery' a year longer and there is an option to defer if necessary/