Summer Born 4's ...

[narnia]

just noticed in today's paper

 

'all children born during the summer months will be forced to start primary scool in the September after their fourth birthday, to stop them falling behnd.

The move will be announced tomorrow after government adviser Sir Jim Rose found those who wait an extra year to start school often fail to catch up.But he will suggest they only attend school part-time at first.

Sir Jim said:'parents need to to be given the facts so they can make an informed choice about when their child starts school because evidence suggests it an have a major impact on the rest of their life, particlarly if they come from a disadvantaged background.

'But we also need to be sure that teachers are giving younger children the right support and are not letting them get elbowed out by older youngsters''

Research by the Institute for Fiscal Studies found there was "an ducation penalty' for August born children, who tend to do less well in national tests.summer-born children are also less likely to go to university.

A senior education source said:'it does not make sense educationally to hold children back in reception class for another year or have them sitting at home when everything shows that they develop best in a formal learning environment'

 

 

discuss...................!!

[Marion]

A senior education source said:'it does not make sense educationally to hold children back in reception class for another year or have them sitting at home when everything shows that they develop best in a formal learning environment'

 

am I allowed to scream?

[HappyMaz]

A senior education source said:'it does not make sense educationally to hold children back in reception class for another year or have them sitting at home when everything shows that they develop best in a formal learning environment'

Well I don't know what to say narnia. I will await the announcement tomorrow with interest but can you hear that strange clanging sound? I fear it may be the death knell for the learning through play ethos which has underpinned the pre-school movement for the last 40 years or so.

[Marion]

so much for EYFS

[HappyMaz]

Out of interest narnia: which paper was this in?

[Gezabel]

A senior education source said:'it does not make sense educationally to hold children back in reception class for another year or have them sitting at home when everything shows that they develop best in a formal learning environment'

 

am I allowed to scream?

 

 

Please can I join you in the screaming, loud, long and clear and preferably from the rooftops

Edited December 7, 2008 by Geraldine

[Marion]

Maz it's in most papers and on the BBC

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/educatio...up-1055694.html

 

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/e...icle5299238.ece

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2008/d...l-policy-report

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7769259.stm

[narnia]

i saw it in the sunday express

 

glad it's not just me screaming quietly then! Isn't odd that almost every other country recognises later starts are actually more benficial, and here we are 'forcing' children into school earlier?I'm moving to scandinavia!

[Sue R]

Well, I guess it's not just the Mail.

 

Why does everyone think that formal structure equals 'learning' and progress??

 

I think we must all be living in a parallel universe to these idiots.

 

Sue

 

PS, sorry, but I've had it lately with this kind of tripe.

[Rea]

Do many children get held back in reception? In my experience all children start school in YR at 4 years old and follow through the school years along with everyone else. My oldest is a June baby. He settled well, achieved top grades throughout his whole school life and has recently been filling in Uni applications. The youngest, a January baby, settled badly, it was YR 2 before he caught onto the fact that school was for more than sharpening pencils and looking out of the window. But he has also been top in everything and is predicted good GCES results.

Does the age our children go to school impact on their learning? By my experience no. It is purely a developmental matter. One of mine was ready the other wasnt. Wouldnt it be common sense, if not maybe a tad impractical, to allow children to enter formal education when they are ready.

At no other time through our lives do we have to do something unless we are ready to do it. Its common for people to learn to drive at 17, I was 25. It hadnt been something i was interested in until then and 3 lessons 4 years earlier had shown me I wasnt ready.

Forcing children into school will be another nail in coffin of PVI settings, and will merely produce children who are less keen to learn.

[hali]

OMG

[Marion]

Forcing children into school will be another nail in coffin of PVI settings, and will merely produce children who are less keen to learn.

 

 

Call me cynical but with a 1-30 ratio in a reception class as opposed to a 1-8 in PVI or 1-13 in nursery it will much cheaper for the government won't it?

[HappyMaz]

PS, sorry, but I've had it lately with this kind of tripe.

I think you're being a bit mean to tripe: surely even that has some nutritional value?

 

I'm wondering how this report will sit with the wealth of evidence provided by the EPPE report et al - and I wonder where Ed Balls is coming from with his comments in the Guardian online article. He must know that by talking about an 'educational premium' for children starting formal schooling so early that he is effectively saying that pre-school settings are only suitable for our youngest children.

 

Our Borough is about to consult on moving from a three-point school entry system to a two-point one. What's the point in this exercise if Jim Rose's report is likely to mean that parents will be forced to send their children to school in the September following their fourth birthday irrespective of whether they are ready?

 

Maz

[Guest]

Hi Everyone

 

Thought I'd join in this very interesting debate. Not all children are ready for school at 4. My son started school at 3 and loved it.

 

but I recently witnessed a very distressing scene outside the Reception Door. A child was screaming and clinging to his

 

mother saying "I don't want to go to school". The Mother was in tears and insisted the child must go.

 

I later heard that the child was disruptive all day and ended up hitting other children - clearly he is not ready to attend

 

school and his behaviour will only hold back the others who are ready to learn.

 

Why not leave the decision to the Nursery School Teachers who have a clear understanding of the children in their care

 

and know when they are ready to move on.

 

Laura

[Rea]

Call me cynical but with a 1-30 ratio in a reception class as opposed to a 1-8 in PVI or 1-13 in nursery it will much cheaper for the government won't it?

 

Marion you have every right to be cynical. I have just spent the last half hour looking at my previous posts because I knew I'd had a feeling some time ago that the government were sneakily trying to get rid of the PVI sector. May 2005 I first voiced my suspisions and nothings changed to make me think any different.

[Cait]

I don't think parents in our county get any choice now. We had a little girl in Preschool a couple of years ago whose parents didn't think she was ready for 'formal education', (indeed she wasn't) and looked into leaving her with us for another year. County kicked up a right old fuss and finally said that she would only get NG, even though if she'd been in school she'd have been funded full time. That was the only reason that they stopped fighting in the end, because Mum's hours had increased at work. It caused a lot of heartache and we all felt very let down.

[Marion]

Do you think this has any connection to Ruth Pimentel's resignation?

[catma]

Is this any different to all the LAs with one point of entry though?? Children do join reception aged 4 already and will be 5 somewhere along the line in that year to be 5 when they start compulsory education in Yr1 in the following Sept. So is this just a national move to what already exists in some places, with built in support for the younger children (which is what I have to fight for with our schools who hav chosen 1 point rather than the 2 the LA has? It may not be quite as dramatic as it's made out to be.

 

I read the following from the Independent "He (Sir Jim Rose) will also suggest that enough time for play is included in the first year of the formal curriculum – to avoid "hothousing" youngsters."as related to what goes on in Yr 1 not in reception as Yr 1 is the first year of formal schooling and Sir Jim Rose is not stupid - I've heard him talk on numerous occassions and he knows what early years is all about.

 

Interestingly for CLLD funded LAs the national stats show the LAs with 1 point of entry do better by their summer born children compared to the rest of LAs.

 

light blue touch paper and stand back...................................................

Edited December 7, 2008 by catma

[Guest]

Children in Stockport start school the September after they are four already. It's been that way for a good few years now. And parents are frowned upon if they even think about starting them later. What worries me is the sentence "when everything shows that they develop best in a formal learning environment". I thought we had ALL decided that this was not good for them and were using the EYFS.

Linda

[Cait]

I'm hoping that "formal learning environment" just means, 'not at home'

 

'cos otherwise, what is EYFS all about?!?!?!?!?!

[emmajess]

[Marion]

"When should children start primary school?

Children in England start their formal schooling one year and in some cases two years earlier than in many other countries, including some countries whose pupils later outperform their English peers in international surveys of educational achievement (see also Primary Review Research Survey 4/2). Report 9/1 shows that while the value of high-quality pre-school education is beyond dispute, the assumption that an early primary school starting age is beneficial for children’s later attainment is not well supported by the research evidence. Meanwhile, there are concerns about the nature of what is provided for four-year olds - the youngest pupils - in primary school reception classes.

 

Thought people might be interested in this in the light of the reports... It's from Jim Rose's Primary Review page 2 : Other primary schools and ours: what can we learn from international comparison?

[Cait]

Thanks for that Marion, very interesting! certainly food for thought

[Alison]

and I will join with the scream AAARRRRGGGGHH!!!!!

 

when the papers are all reporting the same thing it just gives weight and parents start to panic and send their children to school because "all the paper say summer born children are falling behind"

 

I did my disertation on the transition into formal educational and the research I found suggested that sending summer school children too early (such as all children start in september) risks turning them off learning because they where not ready.

[Guest]

In January 12 of our nursery class children will be starting in the reception class. These children have had four months of being the oldest and important role models in the nursery class. This has greatly helped boost their self esteem and they are now ready and confident to move on. Only two of these children would have emotionally coped with starting in our quite formal reception class in september. I cannot see our reception class becoming more play based for younger children, they will just have to be shell shocked and fall into line. Screaming? I'm also tearing my hair out!!!

[Sue R]

Do you think this has any connection to Ruth Pimentel's resignation?

 

Interesting you should say that, 'twas in my mind, too!!.....

[HappyMaz]

Interesting you should say that, 'twas in my mind, too!!.....

Great minds....

[dublinbay]

"The report by Sir Jim Rose, a former chief inspector of primary education, will propose that children are not plunged straight into formal lessons but start off part-time, spending 15 hourse a week at school with an emphasis on play", (Timesonline, 7/12/08).

 

 

Hello!!!!! Aren't our children doing this already at pre-school & nursery??????

[HappyMaz]

Hello!!!!! Aren't our children doing this already at pre-school & nursery??????

Calm down dear: its only another Government initiative!

 

But seriously though - from what I heard on Radio 4 this morning Jim Rose is advocating the 15-hour attendance thing with lots of play-based learning so as dublinbay quite rightly says, exactly what is happening (or will be from next September with the 15 hour entitlement to free nursery education) now. The only difference is that they will be having these fantastic learning though play experiences in school and not in a pre-school group. I'm very concerned at the message this is sending out to parents, but also for the morale of reception teachers, some of whom are already under incredible 'top down' pressure to teach children in the EYFS more formally than they believe is right.

 

I'd be interested to know what primary teachers feel about being given the 'right' to go outside the national curriculum whilst concentrating on six areas of learning and a more holistic approach to teaching though.

 

Just a thought though: who will be teaching these very young four year olds for their 15 hours a week? Will it be called reception class or something else? Will they be taught by someone with QTS or EYPS?

 

Maz

 

PS (should that be "whom are already" or "who are already"?

[Guest heleng]

Not all children start Reception in the September of the year when they are 4, some (like in my school) don't start until the term they are 5. This means they only have 1 term in Reception before moving onto Y1. We often keep the summer borns in Reception for an extra term. But then they only have two terms of Y1.

 

We are lucky in our school and as a fairly newly appointed FS leader (I am a Reception teacher) I have been really pushing the EYFS and play based approach, and provided I can justify it and back it up with evidence so far my head has been happy with the way we are working and the progress the children are making.