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

[CountessDracula]

article here

I remember being in floods at 4 because my brother (1y older) was going to school and I so wanted to go too... twas crap when I finally got there but I loved the idea.

dh is German, summer bday and didn't start until 7, which meant not finishing until 20, then, due to national service and the way the HE system works in Germany, not graduating until 28. It hasn't held him back as such, but it has made our lives a little more difficult.

General starting age is currently 6 in Germany, with the option to hold your child back a year or (recently) put him/her in 6 months earlier. Paediatricians do a school readiness examination thing at age 5. I don't have an issue with the starting age per se, but more with the attitudes around it - learning is (at least was until very recently) demonised before the start of school, as stealing children's 'childhood', and then, after the start of school, the pressure piled on (IMO) very fast - most federal states split up children to three ability-based school types at age 10, and going to the least academic of these types is widely considered to be an utter catastrophe. I would much rather have an earlier but more gradual, or at least less 'loaded', start to formal 'learning' (oh, and a proper comprehensive system and the option to HE, but my dses will probably be parents themselves before Germany introduces those).

ds is just four and can't wait to get into reception (the nursery is part of the foundation unit so he sees what the reception children get up to). He starts in Jan but would be more than ready to start in September, I think. Effectively does a school day already as he goes to nursery club run by childminder in the morning, then a nursery session in the afternoon, coming out at the same time as the school children.

Don't forget the Uk teaching system is changing with the Foundation stage now replacing Reception and nursery and at this stage there will be no formal learning it will be all play. Both my kids are summer babies and I think the new system will be great for my youngest DD who is more than ready now and can't wait to go. She has asked me to teach her to read at the age of 3. What should I do, tell her to go out and play when she is clearly willing. My DS would have been better left to 7 but all kids are different. We are moving more to the continental system of learning even though they will be at 'school'. This is getting more and more so every year.

I think a lot depends on your definintion of "school". Many countries like Finland where children start "school" at seven actually have excellent pre school provision.

My son has loved reception. He has had loads of play. Its has had more in common with nursery than conventional school.

In England childcare is patchy and often expensive. Many parents want their children to go to school as a cheap form of childcare. Also local authorities are often extremely rigid about when a child starts school.

looks like the government agree. just found this on google

Well I started school a year early when I was three. It didn't do me any harm, in fact I loved it. I don't think it's school that's causing the problems per se, more like the ridiculous regime of testing that seems to start the moment they set foot in the door.

With both of mine i could tell they were ready for school. They both started playing up a bit and pushing limits, misbehaving - simply because of frustration and lack of intellectual challenge.

No matter how you organise your day there is no way it is as stimulating or busy as a day at school.

Both times when they went to nursery at 3 they developed dramatically, behaved like angels again, were much happier around the house and their speech and social skills advanced a lot.

I can't imagine having them at home for another two years before this step.

That would be awful both for the kids AND the parents. I think this would be insane.

Plus - it's great to have them out of the house for that period each day. Anyone who wants to be around their kids 24/7 is plain crazy in my books. Everyone needs their own space and time.

no i don't agree they should be at home til the age of 7. but i do think nursery should last from the ages of 3 - 6/7 rather than 3-4 then going straight to school. i think an extra 2 years at nursery would be good. young children learn much better through play and being creative and doing things than they do sitting at a table in a classroom for most of the day.

Isn't that what school should be at such a young age - playing and being creative I mean?

and because of the sats at age 7 things like reading, writing, spelling etc are pushed from an early age whether the children are ready for it or not. in nurseries if the children want to learn at age 3/4 then they will do these things with them but if they are not ready for it then it's not a problem for them to play instead. then all of a sudden cos they are 4/5 and at school they have to sit down and learn how to do these things whether they are ready for it or not. another couple of years of leaving them to be their own guide to their education would do more good than harm imo.

They should scrap the SATS.

the thing is though if children start a formal education so early it often means they get fed up of it and frustrated cos they aren't ready and they are being pushed to do things they aren't capable of yet. that often leads to children disliking school, not trying, not wanting to be there, doing whatever they can to do as little work as possible and leaving as soon as they turn 16. obviously not always, but often it does. it's disheartening to see children as young as 6,7 and 8 saying they hate school and can't wait to leave.

i also think lessons should finish early afternoon leaving time for arts, dance, sport, music in the afternoon. i don't think enough time is given in schools to develop creativity in children. rather than a couple of hours every day its a couple of hours every week.

that's the thing though those that are ready for reading etc are catered for in the nursery/kingdergarten/early years whatever you want to call it setting. those that aren't ready don't have the pressure and can just happily play or whatever.

Ds will go at 5 (starts on his birthday). I have the right to not send him until 6 and still be able to send him to the local school. However there is a black hole in that kindergarten would not be funded for a 5 year old (I think different if special needs).

He has been ready for school for some time (in the UK he would have been at school 6 months earlier which would have been about right), however it's done neither of us any harm to have to wait. I'm sure if the age was 7 and always had been I would feel the same about going at 7.

i totally agree twentypence. i think if they did change it to 6/7 over time we would all become so used to it it wouldn't seem odd to us or the children at all. children know they get to go to school at 4 so once they start nursery they are nagging to go to big school cos they know it's not far away. if they knew they had a few years to wait they probably wouldn't start nagging until they were 5.

obviously if they did raise the starting age then nursery would have to be funded for the extra 2 years.

i also think the school leaving age should be raised to 18. i think 16 is far too young to be making important decisions and that is why so many teenagers drop out of college/uni. often (myself included) they haven't got a clue what they want to do so they pick anything then realise they aren't actually interested in it and it's not what they want to do and so stop going. if people were older and more mature when they had to make such huge decisions more of them would probably make it to the end of their courses.

also i think they should stay in one school all the way through with separate areas for the nursery, primary, secondary and sixth form pupils. imo years 1 - 7 (age 6/7 to 12/13) should have one teacher that teaches most things like we do in our primary schools but as they would start it two years later it would finish two years later iyswim - it would still be 7 years with just a class teacher. then they should get specialist teachers for each subject in years 8 - 12 (13/14 to 17/18) so pretty much like we do now. i think there should be separate colleges aswell for grades 10 - 12 cos sometimes you just need a change. so imo not too much wrong with the structure and my ideal would be very similar but without the two separate schools for primary/secondary.

i think this is very similar to how finland do things.

Ds can go to the one primary school until he is 13 with a class teacher and then high school until 18. There is the choice of an intermediate school from 11-13 with specialist teachers though for those children who would find that more suitable.

There is one school in our town that goes from 5-18, and a private girls school that goes from 3-18. Few children seem to go for the whole time though.

I think more flexibility around Reception and Year 1 would make sense.

Some 4 year old are really ready for Reception but some just aren't. But in the current system whereby if you don't send your 4 yr old into reception they have to go straight into Yr 1 and there may not be a place is putting far too much pressure on.

DS is an August birthday and a friend of mine has a DS who is a 1 Sept birthday. The school let her decide when to start her DS and she decided to give her DS the extra year in Nursery so he is now a year behind my DS who is only 3 weeks older. I strongly suspect that they are probably at a similar reading level - I will ask her actually.

On the other had there is a boy in DS's class who is 11 September birthday so really should be a year below but has flown through all the reading schemes and is just a particularly bright child.

I think more flexibilty around ages 4 and 5 would help.

I hate the whole idea of schools, to be perfectly honest. I just hate it. From the way i know nothing about his life from 9am till 3.30 for even 3 days a week, and I mean nothing, to the fact there are a hundred kids all the same age, and not much interaction between ages.
There are so many things I hate about it yet Ds would be lonely at home, because I'm rather antisocial.
I do think 4 is too little. funnily enough the teachers seem to agree when I've mentioned it.

I feel very stronly that PARENTS should decide exactly when their children start school, and Probably around 6 is optimal IME.

twentypence - where abouts are you? that structure sounds pretty ideal.

I think it's not a matter of not starting school till 7, more like starting FORMAL schooling till then.
In Some european countries where they do this kids, go to preschools/ kindergartens younger but spend much of their day going for walks, playing games, art, music, creative things etc. and developing social skills. When they start formal schooling they catch up and then overtake kids in this country (and they haven't had their childhoods stolen in order to achieve this.)