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.

People that don't want to spend more time with their kids could find other care the rest of the time.

I love spending time with DD, but age 3 she’d much rather be running around with her friends. She gets so upset when I pick her up from nursery early!

People that don't want to spend more time with their kids could find other care the rest of the time.

Well you clearly didn’t want to spend more time with yours, otherwise you wouldn’t have decided to send them to school until they needed to attend as reception is obviously optional, or you would have home schooled. So if school started later it looks like you would send yours a year early anyway.

As others said, it suits our current situation of work and patchy early years provisions. I think it in ways helps but also reinforces some of the flaws there.

It also in part deals with some of the limits and risks of family-only households which can leave people more isolated and those dependant on it - like children - more vulnerable. It can help reduce gaps that start in early ages in language and cultural knowledge, there is a lot out there on that. It's part of why countries with what looks like a later school age have more early years provision among other resources.

All education systems and household types have their pros and cons, nothing is perfect, we can only try to cover what we can. I do think English schools are pushed to do too much - there are too many "objectives" even into the younger years especially when we compare to the countries that people point to as models - but I think that's happened largely at the behest of many parents and it's looks good politically. People always want to add more, but few want to take thing off of schools' plates. It's going to be hard for any party to get backing for pruning back the school curriculum - even while schools aren't required to do it, they're judged on that standard that just has too much going on.

Tbf I’d go half mad if I had DD all the time till she was 7.

The people talking about comparisons with other countries are spot on. It's a complete non idea that not starting formal learning until later means those kids don't go to school or some place of learning!

I lived in an EU country where school isn't compulsory until 6. Sounds great until you add in the context that in fact, to get a place at the school you want, you have to take it when the vast majority start school at 2.5. Then add in that all 2.5 year olds starting school have to be potty trained and will be in a class of about 22-25 with a teacher but no assistant so the class is far more formal than even our reception classes. Then add in that most children start full time childcare at about 3 months because that's when mat leave ends and the cost of living is high so most women work. Not sounding so rosy now is it??

Reception follows the EYFS curriculum so it's play based. The school day is 9-3:30 ish so is much shorter than a lot of kids do at nursery. If you'd wanted part time, your DD could have done part time hours at nursery to prepare for school. As a society we need the most disadvantaged kids to be in childcare/education ASAP because we know that's the best way to better their life chances.

For those of you who are interested in the early years of school, dig into whether your schools are starting to adopt a more provision based approach to KS1. I dread to say play based because somebody will come along and say it doesn't challenge their high achieving DC but having taught KS1 (and EYFS and into upper KS2) it's by far the best approach for a more age appropriate way of learning (and adds far more challenge for those who can!).

The thing is we live in a large, complex society.
It is organised (as it must be in order to function) in a way that suits the majority of the people that live in it.
For most children and parents school works just fine. That doesn’t mean it can’t be tweaked or improved but it does it’s job for most people.
You have a choice to do things differently for you’re family. You say you don’t want her to miss out etc but all choices come with compromises.
You have to decide what the best compromise is for you.
And be honest with yourself. The fact that you miss your child now she’s at school is really irrelevant. It’s not about you. If SHE is unhappy or being negatively impacted then maybe home schooling is right for you. But it must be about her, not your feelings.
Part time schooling is very difficult for schools to manage. The child is constantly missing stuff and having to be caught up which no one has the man power for.
Finally, I think you need to rethink your attitude to working parents. You speak as though everyone has a choice whether their kids go to school/childcare from 8-5 everyday. They don’t.

The main reason isn't so people can work its how the education system is and in many countries they go to kindergarten at 4 as well, most children would of already been at nursery for several hours a werk before school and like you said you have the option to keep them at home until 5
My ds was 4 in the august and went to school , he did just fine , yes tired at first but that disappeared after a couple of weeks , I could of kept him home but he already had beeb going to preschool etc anyway

@BiBabbles

As others said, it suits our current situation of work and patchy early years provisions. I think it in ways helps but also reinforces some of the flaws there.

It also in part deals with some of the limits and risks of family-only households which can leave people more isolated and those dependant on it - like children - more vulnerable. It can help reduce gaps that start in early ages in language and cultural knowledge, there is a lot out there on that. It's part of why countries with what looks like a later school age have more early years provision among other resources.

All education systems and household types have their pros and cons, nothing is perfect, we can only try to cover what we can. I do think English schools are pushed to do too much - there are too many "objectives" even into the younger years especially when we compare to the countries that people point to as models - but I think that's happened largely at the behest of many parents and it's looks good politically. People always want to add more, but few want to take thing off of schools' plates. It's going to be hard for any party to get backing for pruning back the school curriculum - even while schools aren't required to do it, they're judged on that standard that just has too much going on.

Yes! The curriculum in KS1 is crazy and until parents make a stand, nothing will be done. But the overriding opinion of most parents seems to be teach them more!

@Toodlydoo

Tbf I’d go half mad if I had DD all the time till she was 7.

. Same

DD2 (3yo at nursery) gets really upset when she doesn't go to school and play with other kids. With Covid all she saw were her sisters.....

Maybe you can arrange with the school to only do half days

Some children need it. My dd had far outgrown nursery by the time she was 4. Loved reception but hated year one as she couldn't understand why they had to play all afternoon. Three days a week is no good for those of us who have to work.

@mafsfan
I completely agree about the KS1 curriculum. I’m a primary teacher myself and it really could do with and overhaul.

[quote Smartiepants79]@mafsfan
I completely agree about the KS1 curriculum. I’m a primary teacher myself and it really could do with and overhaul.[/quote]
Yep me too. I despair every year when I read back through the year 2 NC objectives and TAF criteria

That said, I don't agree with starting to read, write and do maths so young. I was 6yo and did great! A lot of people I spoke to (also from other countries) say the same.

Imo the issue isn't when children start school, it's the content of school. Some children are ready for formal lessons, others would benefit from a play-based approach for a couple more years. Why can't romping in the woods be part of school so all children are given the chance to do this? I suspect it comes down to resources...circle time and formal phonics teaching are a lot cheaper to run and require less space than outdoor, play-based learning.

You could also homeschool for a couple of years and pay for a nanny the days you work if you wanted
It seems you want 3 days so you can work them yet accuse others of only sending to school so they can work
The school system can't be set to work around what everyone would like
I bet theres lots of parents sending there babies go nursery from 8-6 who don't want to , but paying mortgage and bills mean they have to
You do have options just not ones that are free

@Peanutsandchilli

Reception is play based and very much like nursery. I think part of the problem in this country is that there are many parents who just don't give a damn about their children's education, and plenty of others who struggle to afford to provide the basics for their child. By making education compulsory from age 5, they're ensuring that these children get a positive start to life, which is vital imo.

Not!!! They learn how to read and write that is not at all "like nursery"

@grey12

That said, I don't agree with starting to read, write and do maths so young. I was 6yo and did great! A lot of people I spoke to (also from other countries) say the same.

Out of interest why not? My six year old can read fairly well, he has been reading basic books independently since the age of four, the same with basic addition and subtraction. What benefit would he get from not being allowed to read, or do basic sums etc until the age of six?

I have no issues with them starting at 4.

Why is different to some other countries?
Getting parents back into the workplace has to be a big political factor…

I suspect many kids in countries where formal school starts at7 actually attend kindergarten type settings much earlier for substantial parts of the week.

Reception is play based learning so lots of fun when they first start. Mine were desperate to start school - they had been at full time nursery from six months old and they were definitely ready for going to proper school.

Countries with a later starting age still have organised play based learning but just don’t call it school.

In terms of the hours spent at school - 9am - 3.30pm, the children don't spend the whole 6.5 hours sitting in a classroom. I found this timetable in the handbook of a local primary school (bear in mind, I'm in Scotland):

Morning Session 1 - 9am - 10:30am (1 hour, 30 minutes)
Morning Break - 10:30am - 10:50am
Morning Session 2 - 10:50am - 12:20pm (1 hour, 30 minutes)
Lunch Time - 12:20pm - 1:30pm
Afternoon Session - 1:30pm - 3:10pm (1 hour, 40 minutes)
Total Class time: 4 hours, 40 minutes

This is for Primary 1 and Primary 2 pupils so age 4.5 - 6 roughly. Primary 3 - Primary 7 get 10 minutes less for lunch and 10 minutes longer afternoon session.

Of course this varies from school to school, but c'mon! It's not like they're working a full 7.5 hour day with a half hour lunch break or anything. Also bear in mind time to take coats and bags off and actually get settled first thing, after break and lunch and getting ready at the end of the day probably takes away an extra half hour!

I do agree it is crazy how a 2-incomes have become pretty much the norm/required (increase in housing prices etc.) This makes it so much harder for songle parent families to cope or earn enough to get on housing ladder etc. And makes a parent working less while childen are young much less of a "choice."

Smartiepants79 interesting points - but actually I am a working parent and work 5 days a week - For the first 4 years I managed my work to fit round my DC and yes I suppose in some ways am privileged to have a job that enables me to do that but it doesn't feel quite so privleleged when getting up at 5am to do it to be available at 7am or working into the small hours. It wasn't everyday and there was flexibility in that so I recognise some fortune in my set up - though it is a set up I actively set about creating.

My sentence People that don't want to spend more time with their kids could find other care the rest of the time. - as I've said on other subsequent posts isn't to imply that those parents don't care. I'm querying whether we could have a society that starts with people who don't want the 9-320 5 days a week model and are willing/able to adapt their working day/salary as the norm and then others who don't want to make those changes could adjust - rather than what we have at the moment which is having to opt out of a system if you want to make those sacrifices. Let's have a system that asks those who don't want to make those sacrifices to find the alternatives. - Kerboom - shoot me down. I simply don't see what children are gaining from 30 hours across 5 days that couldn't be got from slightly less. We've all made changes to the ways we work during Covid.

@ChocolateHoneycomb

I have no issues with them starting at 4.

Why is different to some other countries?
Getting parents back into the workplace has to be a big political factor…

I suspect many kids in countries where formal school starts at7 actually attend kindergarten type settings much earlier for substantial parts of the week.

Where my husband is from formal school starts at seven.

Most children (80%ish) attend nursery until they’re five, here they learn to read, write, count etc, when they turn six they attend kindy where they improve their reading, writing, spelling and maths. They then start compulsory school at 7, yet people seem to think they start reception style learning at age 7.

Reception should be play-based learning but the play element seems to be being eroded by many schools and completely gone by year 1.