Why do we send children to school so young

[sandcastles1]

Just that really - I'm feeling really disgruntled with our school system and why we make children go into full time education from the age of 4. My dc just started and is enjoying some of it and hating lots of it. She loved the first week when it was half days. For the past four years she has been either with me or her dad - we would take her out into the woods every day. Now she's cooped up in a small room/playground for the whole time. I could have home schooled her I know but didn't think that was the best thing socially. I can see the benefits of them going but 5 days a week 9-330 just seems harsh. Why couldn't it be three days. I know up until 5 we can take them out but just wondering how others feel as I'm missing my daughter a lot, she doesn't want to be there most of the time and I really now see the virtues of other countries that don't start full time until 7. Yes it means we can work, but why is that the norm? People that don't want to spend more time with their kids could find other care the rest of the time.

I think reception was play based as the best early years practice should be. However, in the new Department for Education Reading Framework, there is a very subtle move away from play. True of and the OFSTED curricula guides too. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachmentdata/file/1000986/ReadinggframeworkTeachinggthefoundationssofliteracyy-_July-2021.pdf

@Coffeepants

I am lucky yes, but I’ve also actively taken a smaller mortgage than I could afford, chosen to not spend money on gadgets, cars, etc. tend to live well under my means and have always done so even when I earned a lot less. So while I am privileged, I’ve also consciously made decisions over the last 20 years that will allow me to choose to have more time with my children.

And you say you aren't judging people. As soon as you mention gadgets and cars you are judging people. It's like the comments that proclaim women work for luxuries and men work to provide.

So what if someone chooses to work or needs to work. It doesn't mean they love their child any less or don't enjoy spending time with them.

Couldn't have said it better than @Magicalwoodlands.

You don't appear to understand that some people don't have the privilege of making the choices you have despite also having worked extremely hard, they have not been as fortunate as you for reasons out of their control.

You also have no awareness that others have different opinions to you and place value on different things to you in life exactly as Magicalwoodlands described - that does not make them bad people or worse parents. We are all different and that should be seen as a good thing - there is so much we can learn from each other instead of using the differences to judge and belittle others

@Coffeepants

Wholeheartedly agree, it comes down to individual circumstances. But if you’re working with a long term view, so you not see any benefit to working less (If possible) and having more time in the primary years?

Is that benefit worth the cost to the woman's career? (As a separate note, should it only fall to the woman, why can't the father take the time instead?)

Does that parent want to and enjoy all the things you enjoy with your child? Do they want to play with them the same way as you do?
Clearly a revelation to you but some parents prefer to work rather than doing the mundane day to day childcare and education then enjoy they can afford lots of other things at the weekend (the kind of things you consider a waste of money). This does not make them worse parents than you, just different opinions

By age 4 most children are ready for something more and all learning is play based. Most reception classes I've been in consist of short 10 minute bursts of learning (singing songs, stories, flash cards etc.) with the rest of the day focused on free play. There will be crafts available to fit with each weeks theme and most classes have free flow with outdoor play where possible.

They might attend assembly, interact with older children, eat lunch in a social group and generally start learning how to interact with each other, make friends, take turns etc.

It's really nothing like working (although the children do get tired) and for the majority of kids its an excellent way to prepare them for formal learning later on.

@MrsSkylerWhite

Agree with you. Don’t have the answers though. Suspect that not starting full time schooling until 7 would make working life very difficult for millions of people informs policy 🤷‍♀️

Don’t get this argument. In Germany they start at 6/7 yet there is very cheap f/t childcare available for children from a very young age.

Why would I care what other parenting choices people make? If you feel those are good choices for your children and you’re happy then go ahead. My comments were largely directed to posters who have wondered why would happen to women’s careers, progression, etc. this implies we are not talking about making ends meet. Which is all well and good but my response to that is that I am choosing differently.

Perhaps you’re right, I have a sheltered view of things, but I will argue that as an immigrant I’ve worked my ass off to achieve anything, to be able to make the choices I can.

Either way, peace and my sincere apologies for any judgement and insult. I just don’t agree with the system but that’s my problem, not yours.

It has been interesting to hear other perspectives but my view is still that 4 is too young for formalized learning and will likely to look at alternatives from year 1.

@Coffeepants

Wholeheartedly agree, it comes down to individual circumstances. But if you’re working with a long term view, so you not see any benefit to working less (If possible) and having more time in the primary years?

I’m not being an arse but you’ll have to run that one past me again.

Your message re not having to scrimp and save, and providing for your dc implied to me you’re not purely working to put a roof over their heads. Which is similar to my situation. In which case I feel less time working and more time with my children while they are young, would be beneficial to us both. However, I guess this won’t apply if you are happy with the school system, have no inclination to homeschool, etc. for me I’d be making the choice to do less work either way so I don’t have to count on wraparound care.

@Aroundtheworldin80moves

Maybe schools could do the 'core learning' in the morning, put the stuff like pe, music, art etc in the afternoon and make afternoons optional.

That wouldn't be good, things like PE, music and art aren't less important.

My comments were largely directed to posters who have wondered why would happen to women’s careers, progression, etc. this implies we are not talking about making ends meet. Which is all well and good but my response to that is that I am choosing differently.

And that's exactly my point. Why should women only be working to make ends meet. Why is it wrong to have a career and want to progress in that career? Any reduction in school hours has a direct impact on women's careers ( as we saw during the pandemic). When you start talking about not buying gadgets, cars etc you are passing judgement on women who work because they want to not just because they need to.

It might not be your intention but that's how it comes across.

We could survive on my husband's salary but I don't want to for a number of reasons. I'm not comfortable not being financially independent and my career means a lot to me and I've invested an awful lot of time and money in it. That doesn't make me a bad parent.
I'm a university academic and I research women's career development so it's a subject a feel very strongly about!

Don’t get this argument. In Germany they start at 6/7 yet there is very cheap f/t childcare available for children from a very young age.

There isn't cheap f/t childcare available here abc we don't have the infrastructure in place to provide it.

There’s nothing wrong with wanting a career or progression. I currently am doing further professional qualifications and recently took on more responsibility in my role. My point is that why does it have to be at the expense of spending time with your kids? (If like me, you want more time with them)

I agree about financial independence, I would never give up work completely or do nothing to earn an income. But my priorities have changed and I’m okay with progressing less or staying where I am for now.

Why not though? Since state schools are free, the government is effectively paying for those kids anyway. It would just be a different means. It absolutely should be available to anyone who wants or needs it.

My point is that why does it have to be at the expense of spending time with your kids? (If like me, you want more time with them)

There's that judgement again!!

@Coffeepants

Why not though? Since state schools are free, the government is effectively paying for those kids anyway. It would just be a different means. It absolutely should be available to anyone who wants or needs it.

Schools barely have enough money to function. School based pre school provision isn't suitable for working parents due to the hours and the fact it doesn't come with out of school provision ....so why would that be any different if we extended that to age 7?

It would mean parents paying extra for childcare which is scarce to begin with!

Which is all great, and what my DC is loving about being there. I would like to have just a little bit more time with her and she with me and I think me doing a bit more stuff with her alongside what is going on in school would complement the system well and have the greatest benefit. Yes I can take her out and home school her on a couple of days up until she is 5 - but that makes her different.

My original post was to see if others felt like me and felt that 4 was too young to be in class for 30 hours a week and if others wanted to spend more time with them if society could structure itself to support that. It if it was a majority then it's something that could happen in the future and it would become the mainstream. But it isn't the majority on here, and that does surprise me.

I am surprised that people actively would prefer to work 40 hour weeks and for school hours to stay at 30 hours to facilitate that as much as possible. I understand that people feel the need to work 40 hours financially - but that is a different argument. I was asking - is this what we want and if it isn't what does it look like? But people are very adamantly saying it is what they want.

I think society is actually on the shift - there is loads happening around the 4 day week - Scotland, Iceland - loads happening around flexible working and a lot of different types of schooling developing. If it does all take off, eventually it will become the mainstream and I won't feel such of an outsider and different.

@SkinnyMirror

My point is that why does it have to be at the expense of spending time with your kids? (If like me, you want more time with them)

There's that judgement again!!

I’ve literally said why do I have to choose? I’m not judging anyone. You have free will and I don’t really care what you do.

You're assuming people don't already work flexibly....... just because someone works full time hours it doesn't mean those hours are mon- fri and 9-5.

As a single mum I needed to work so DS starting at 4 + four weeks was a blessing in terms of cutting child care costs.

Thankfully my ds had stood outside primary school since 3.5 and said 'why can't I go too mummy?'. He's loved it ever since so I didn't have to cope with any guilt. I missed him but he was ready.

I guess more people working means GDP is higher, tax take is higher, the need for benefits is less.

I’ve literally said why do I have to choose? I’m not judging anyone. You have free will and I don’t really care what you do.

You come across as incredibly judgemental.

Asking why working and career progression has to come at the expense of spending time with your child is ill informed and judgemental.

I do hope we have that shift, I agree it won’t happen if majority don’t want it. And the majority have expressed they are quite content with current arrangements. In fact they are so adamant that it’s insulting to disagree and to want a different life.
It’s reflective of the county as a whole, delusional exceptionalism. We are so wonderful at everything we do, no one could possibly to do it better.

But like you, I would do the home school/part school till 5 but don’t want my children to be the “other” given we are already brown and immigrants.

In the meantime - I'm just a bit sad, miss my DC and feel for her spending all day every day in the same building - I'll think again about taking her out one or two afternoons - but it does make her different and that, as I am experiencing on here, is quite hard.

I am surprised that people actively would prefer to work 40 hour weeks and for school hours to stay at 30 hours to facilitate that as much as possible. I understand that people feel the need to work 40 hours financially - but that is a different argument. I was asking - is this what we want and if it isn't what does it look like? But people are very adamantly saying it is what they want.

I bloody love my job. DS has loved school since day 1. Why is that so surprising?

Live in Canada and kids start a year later. I prefer it