Educating little ones ......

Luckygirl3
I think it is the parents who want the labels, not the teachers.

I see this a lot.
When I began teaching, the attitude I met was that children didn’t have problems until they reached KS2. Everything else was slow development and most children would eventually catch up. I thought it was crazy!
Early diagnosis is great, but some parents see a label, not only as a way to get their child more help, which may or may not be necessary, but as a magic wand which will cure what they see as a problem.
E.g. A parent whose child spent a period related to his justified ‘label’ at a PRU, was irate that his behaviour at home wasn’t magically transformed and loudly slated school and the PRU on FB.

(and - by the way) my third child didn't attend nursery or preschool, being perfectly content and happy at home. She started school at five (when required to do so) not needing to 'catch up' or develop her social skills at all, then went on to succeed at everything.

Luckygirl3, I totally agree with you. After many years teaching, I despair at the damage our system does (along with the unrealistic expectations of pushy, competitive parents.) I'm amazed that so many kids manage to cope with it all.

Countries with informal learning through play, followed by a later start of formal education, do very well - so why do we persist with our 'traditional' ways? Of course, the 'school day' is a convenient means of babysitting!

Luckygirl3

I think it is the parents who want the labels, not the teachers.

because they want their children to receive the best support. I don;t want to see children who can be educated in mainstream sent away to 'special schools' like when I was a child. I remember one of my friends being 'sent away' because he was hyperactive and would most probably be dx with adhd now. Luckily his parents could afford to privately educate him until he rejoined us all at high school.

I am not against special schools btw it;s just they are there for children who really cannot be educated successfully in mainstream.

I don't think we are even talking about early years in this thread. The OP and others have been discussing the prescriptive, over focused learning delivered at 6 years old and how this can stifle young children's enjoyment at school. Constant assessments and labels, along with rigid teaching, at that age, Year 1, are not an indication of how successful a child will be 10 years on, and certainly not later in life. I rate a good allround education, not just based on academic achievement, very highly at any age.

DaisyAnne that’s why it’s so disappointing when children come to school without the conversational vocabulary that they used to acquire at home, without the social skills they used to acquire before school and without the experience of developing schema that give them building blocks which they can use and apply in new situations.
Early years are the most important, but now the experiences most children had 1-1 or in a small group before starting school are becoming a necessary part of EYFS and the staffing numbers make it difficult to provide the 1-1 or small group necessary. The children who come to school with those skills already developed want and deserve more.

Joseanne

Well, sorry, DaisyAnne, I disagree with St. Ignoramus LaLa. In my opinion, no child should put in a compartment and effectively written off at age 6 or 7 years for whatever reason.
Anyway, I always understood it was the Greek philosopher Aristotle who said that not St. Ignatious Loyola?

Interesting to see how highly you rate your opinion. Which sector of the education world does not believe that early years education has the greatest influence on most people's lives? I would like to read their views.

None of my grandchildren enjoy school, I wouldn’t say they hate it, but they certainly don’t like it.
I find this really sad, as I enjoyed school, and so did our children.
As far as I can see there’s no catering to the individual child, it’s a one size fits all kind of set up, and for many children that won’t work.
Our youngest will start in September, if they can get her to sit still and stop talking for five minutes, I’ll be amazed, but I’ll hate to see that spirit tamed, I agree with others, give her another year before she’s expected to sit down and learn.

Well, sorry, DaisyAnne, I disagree with St. Ignoramus LaLa. In my opinion, no child should put in a compartment and effectively written off at age 6 or 7 years for whatever reason.
Anyway, I always understood it was the Greek philosopher Aristotle who said that not St. Ignatious Loyola?

Joseanne

Don't tell me what any child is achieving at 6 years old; tell me at 16 and I'll be impressed.

What a lack of understanding you have about early years and how what is available affects a child's development.

As St Ignatius Loyola said "“Give me a child until he is 7, and I will give you the man.” So what do the Conservatives do? Destroy the very good Sure Start system and underpay those caring for the very young. They just don't care, do they? Not for you, not for me and certainly not for all our futures.

I think it is the parents who want the labels, not the teachers.

Don't tell me what any child is achieving at 6 years old; tell me at 16 and I'll be impressed.

4 of my GC (from 2 different households) go to the same primary school. 3 of them are Summer born. They’re all different in terms of their strengths and weaknesses but are all thriving. The school is strict and traditional and they love it! I’ve not heard a negative comment from any of them. They even cope ok with the homework. I’m a fan of some sort of flexible structure for this age group and also a routine which gives them confidence in knowing what to expect most of the time. This doesn’t mean that they don’t have fun or do any playing but it does begin to equip them to be independent learners and to use their initiative.

I don't agree that schools are eager to label children either...

In the first years adaptations might be put in place for children that need them but there are so many things children might be dealing with that guide behaviour that trying to foist off some sort of diagnosis early would be counterproductive long term.

Also it's not about "labels". For example, someone who is autistic is not autism. Autistic people are still highly individual and having a diagnosis of autism does not mean a one size fits all approach for a child by any means. It's not a label it is a guide for caregivers to understand a child better.

I worked in Sweden for a number of years, where highly-subsidised pre-schooling is available from age 1 to 6, continuing into further schooling from age 7, which is the stage where a more formally structured, disciplined approach to education begins. This system seems to work well. My 8 year old Grandson is currently attending our local primary school here in the UK, where I'm pleased to say that his earlier years were fairly relaxed, with a focus on developmental issues and on the learning of social skills. We are all well-pleased with the results, but our experience is based on a single school,. Also, as we are not education professionals I don't feel qualified to judge the quality of more general primary education. All I have to go on is our own personal experience, which has been good.

I have a July child and a September child. They both went through three years of infant school, the July one going to the Juniors at just seven, the September one at eight. Their achievements were the same, the younger one at no apparent disadvantage.

I don't think schools are quick to label children at all, I think it's quite the opposite.

Preschool in countries where school starts later often have quite prescriptive activities-e.g. colouring or drawing things the correct shape and colour. Spending time in early years abroad whilst teacher training, I watched in horror as a child’s purple “tree”was put in the bin and he was made to do it correctly. I listened as 3-4 year olds were made to repeat, “Eet eez uh bol, or eet eez uh kek (cake).
They do learn letter formation in many of these countries and parents, anxious for their child to progress in something measurable to them, buy workbooks for the child to do at home.

UK EYFS is now much more relaxed in terms of learn through play, though often it stresses parents that their child is not learning formal work, especially when they think their child has been doing much the same thing in preschool.
The 12 month difference between September, born child and an August born child has always been a concern for me, but as someone mentioned in an earlier post, age is not always an indication of maturity or readiness, ability or desire to learn.

Children learn through play. The skilled teacher or parent talks to them as they play so they learn concepts, language, and numeracy skills.

My GS is 5 and started primary school last autumn. He literally (and yes, I do mean literally) does not sit still for 30 seconds, so god only knows how he copes in a classroom situation. Even at home, whether he is playing with lego or supposedly watching something on TV, he is constantly bouncing around. He has the attention span of a goldfish - but he is very bright. I just don't think he has the capacity to sit at a desk and concentrate for any length of time.

Whitewavemark2

I think those countries who delay formal education until 6 or 7 have got it cracked.

I live and have taught in a country that starts formal education when children are 6 or 7 and I honestly believe that this is too late for the majority of children.

They have been bored for the last year or 18 months of kindergarten and are so used to nothing being expected of them, that starting school, where we have long since given up expecting them to sit still and concentrate for long periods is hard.

I am devoutly thankful that I started school at 5½ I can still remember how bored I was at school for the last four months before I finally was able to go to school.

What is needed is not a fixed age of 5, 6 or 7, but an assessment by experienced primary 1 teachers as to when each child is ready to start school from the age of 5 as the lowest time, and 7 as the latest.

Both my daughters were born in a country where children start school in the September before their 7th Birtday. They went to Kindergarten for 3 years before this, which was all play based with no formal education. We moved back to the UK when the eldest was 11 and the youngest 8, so they had 5 years and 2 years respectively of formal education before switching to the UK system. I was a bit concerned - particularly for my younger daughter - that they may struggle as they had had 2 years less at school than their peers, but neither of them had any problems whatsoever. In fact my elder daughter was ahead in all subjects by at least a year, so they lost nothing educationally by starting school two years later than children in the UK. I think 4 is far too young to expect children to sit and concentrate, and be assessed. Our experience suggests that there is nothing to be gained from it either.

Having had nothing to do with primary education since DD left it 25 years ago, I'm thrilled with what I see through KS1 DGD. She's great at number work, reads really well and seems to enjoy school.

Whitewavemark2

I think those countries who delay formal education until 6 or 7 have got it cracked.

What we do need to remember though, is that these countries also often provide free Pre-School. Finland's is from 3 to 6 and is required by law. So they are actually in compulsory education earlier than our children but that the style of education changes at a different time.

I've got mixed feeling about this I do think children with learning difficulties need early assessment and early intervention. I'm not sure that any of the processes currently used in primary schools actually deal properly with those children and provide for them.
I'd like to see a much more child centred approach which catered for all children. I'd also like to see some fun put back into education. I was a bit of a stickler for peace and quiet when children were working, but I did know that they also needed time to let off steam and have fun some of the time.
I think teachers are so stressed now they are passing it on to the children, I don't think it is deliberate, I think it is just unfortunate that such an emphasis is put on testing.
My DGCs have completely different attitudes to testing DGD is hard working and has worried about her spelling scores since reception. DGS thinks it's all a waste of time and really doesn't care-sometimes he does very well and sometimes it's a disaster.