or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Childhood and Beyond › Education › Learning at School › Minimum schooling age getting lower and lower
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Minimum schooling age getting lower and lower - Page 2

post #21 of 67
Pre school aka headstart, pre k and K are full time here 3/4 yo are in school from 8-3 every day.

The only difference is pre school and pre k do not make a big deal out of it if you come get your child early while in K 12 days a year is the limit on missing excused or not.
post #22 of 67
It really really freaks me out that anyone is going to make rules about where your three or four year old baby should be all day. I'm all for optional flexible programs, but mandatory all day five days a week "class" for three year olds - yikes. No.
post #23 of 67
I'm totally not cool with mandatory schooling for 3 and 4 year olds.

BUT, I did enjoy my part time preschool. I started at age 3 and went until I was 5, and then I started full time K. I LOVED it. I always enjoyed school. But I realize that the needs of every child is different, and I absolutely do not agree with trying to force parent's to put their kids in school at such a young age. I think for some kids (like me) it's a good thing... if they're not getting enough attention or care at home, they could certainly thrive and excel and be around teacher's who will care about them. But for everyone? No.
post #24 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by MommyTorf View Post
devil's advocate:

I work in a failing public school where some of the third graders STILL can't read! Going to school early is an ABSOLUTE blessing for some children. It's better that they are in a HeadStart classroom from age 3 instead of at home watching TV all day.

It's too bad that more children don't have the kind of parents that float around here at MDC.
Thanks. Now explain why those same headstart kids in my city are still behind and reading at a 3rd grade level in middle school.

It has freaking nothing to do with how soon academics are started. For my state, it has everything to do with the stupid test that schools need to comply to. Take the last school district newsletter. It was all about how many stupid points the damn school acquired in the last year. Nothing about community service, nothing about what that school did. Just simply X school was now up to the bar with Y points.

Points don't matter if a kid is lost in the process.
post #25 of 67
I received a letter in the mail telling me about state school places for my 3yo when he turns 4.
It is full time too: 9 to 15:30. Oh, and my son can't play with anybody his age during the day because they are all in nursery school.

In Denmark where we used to live, kids start at 6 or 7. Yes, most do go to daycare from 1yo (fully paid maternity leave until that time), but they don't do any academic work at all before school age.
post #26 of 67
Preschool isn't a new concept, wealthy families in certain cultures have sent their kids to schools at around 3 yo for quite some time. My dad went to preschool in Ireland in the early 1930s. I went to preschool back in the 1970s. Maria Montessori developed her systems in Italy back in the 1920s.

Public preschools and headstart are being opened to provide all families with an option wealthy families have had for a long time. One of the reasons we bought a house in the town we did was b/c it offered a free preschool. They changed it though the year DS wa born, and we have ended up paying a small fortune to send him to a Montessori preschool , it's ok though b/c he really likes it and it's probably better than the public one was.

I do of course agree that it should remain optional, but I think it's great for some kids.
post #27 of 67
For my working mom (late 1970s), preschool was essentially daycare. She tells me so now. She wanted to work and since there was no one to watch me in this area, she chose preschool because I was 4. Before my parents moved, my grandmother watched me.
post #28 of 67
Quote:
She talked about how by the time they get to kindergarten, they've already learned so many bad habits and it's too late for some of them to become good readers or even good citizens.
she's absolutely right though, in terms of high-risk kids. mamabain (PP) said it well---you have no idea how deprived some children are in their home environments. Studies have been done that those kids have something like 90% fewer verbal interactions than other children, and the majority of times they are spoken to it is negative (shut up, sit down, don't do that). When your home environment is so impoverished (and I'm not talking finances, I'm talking simple interactions with your parents, positive feedback, hugs) there is no way you can suddenly function in a kindergarten environment 5 years later. I'm not talking about reading, I'm talking about relating to others, making transitions, etc.

It's sad to think about, but there are homes out there where this is the norm. Some of the children involved show behaviors similar to those of institutionalized kids. Your child may not need preschool, but I believe they do.
post #29 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by philomom View Post
I agree that it is the working parents who will benefit most from school starting at an earlier age.

However, I'm 42 and my dh's mother got my hubby in school a whole year earlier because she was tired of him hanging around the house all day. Jeez. And she wonders why I won't leave her my kids in my will.
I know how it is. I had the same kind of parents. My parents divorced and my mom worked several jobs at a time usually, leaving me in daycare at the age of 4, started school early (graduated at 17), at home with my older siblings before and after school, I walked to the bus alone for years and was a latch-key kid by 10 years old. I hated it and I didn't want my kids to turn out that way so I homeschool them for now.
post #30 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by waiflywaif View Post
you have no idea how deprived some children are in their home environments. Studies have been done that those kids have something like 90% fewer verbal interactions than other children, and the majority of times they are spoken to it is negative (shut up, sit down, don't do that). When your home environment is so impoverished (and I'm not talking finances, I'm talking simple interactions with your parents, positive feedback, hugs) there is no way you can suddenly function in a kindergarten environment 5 years later. I'm not talking about reading, I'm talking about relating to others, making transitions, etc.
but those same children "might" (not saying they are) be better off in a school environment each day rather than being home in something more negative or tough on them. So it can certainly go either way.
post #31 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by waiflywaif View Post
she's absolutely right though, in terms of high-risk kids. mamabain (PP) said it well---you have no idea how deprived some children are in their home environments. Studies have been done that those kids have something like 90% fewer verbal interactions than other children, and the majority of times they are spoken to it is negative (shut up, sit down, don't do that). When your home environment is so impoverished (and I'm not talking finances, I'm talking simple interactions with your parents, positive feedback, hugs) there is no way you can suddenly function in a kindergarten environment 5 years later. I'm not talking about reading, I'm talking about relating to others, making transitions, etc.

It's sad to think about, but there are homes out there where this is the norm. Some of the children involved show behaviors similar to those of institutionalized kids. Your child may not need preschool, but I believe they do.
This may be so, and I am sure that there are homes like this. But, starting school at an earlier age is not an answer but a bandaid. These same kids if in school at age three are still going home to that neglectful house.

Perhaps instead of using tax dollars to fund earlier and earlier schooling we should make parenting classes mandatory. Let's face it...the kids aren't the ones screwed up it's usually us parents.

If you really want smart, compassionate and lovely children then starting with conception the parents need to have coping techiniques and resources to benefit their child BEFORE school starts.
post #32 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by moominmamma View Post
Public school in Ontario Canada starts at age 3 years 9 months for kids born at the end of December. Boggles the mind. It's called Junior Kindergarten (JK) and is the beginning of regular school, with a adult:child ratio of up to 1 in 20. On a Canadian parenting message board I frequent the education forum is full of posts from moms whose 3- and 4-year-olds cry and don't want to go to school, and of responses that reassure them that this is normal. Yeah, "normal" in that disturbed reality, I don't doubt it.

Miranda
That will be my son in September '09. He turns 4 on December 22 '09. But, if he is not ready, I will happily hold him back and just start him in SK. (I don't want to start him in JK a year late though, because he is already going to be by far the tallest kid in the class).
I actually am starting him in what I'm calling "small school" next week, but it's actually a home daycare with just 5 other kids, and I'm doing it because he has been really keen lately on playing at friend's houses without me (trading babysitting with friends) and I think he is prime for benefitting from hanging out with a small group of kids without me. And I'm prime for a bit of a break one or two mornings a week!
post #33 of 67
I am definitely against making any kind of school for younger children (3-4) mandatory. However, my mom has spent a couple decades in an at risk urban school district, and while these kinds of suggestions and rules seem awful to us, many children do not have homes like the ones we provide. Most of the student in her school district start kindergarten with 10,000 LESS reading hours than those students in a more affluent district. This doesn't mean the kids aren't reading, but that no one has ever read to them. She said on her home visits, many of the homes had exactly zero books in the house. The attitude in many (certainly not all) households was that reading was not important. That's one heck of a handicap to enter elementary school with imo. I don't see this as trying to force more schooling on children who are already in thriving households, but rather trying to give the children who are in disadvantaged homes a chance to see a book or the alphabet before they enter kindergarten. Certainly this isn't a problem for the children of parents here or the majority of people we probably encounter daily, but in many areas it is a real and valid concern. Can you imagine your child's first year if they'd never held a book or had one read to them?

Now, that's not to say this is necessarily being approached the right way, or that the ideas of requiring schooling at an earlier age are the right solution. However, on the flip side, starting school at 4 isn't a new concept either. Until they raised the starting date/age, children regularly started kindy sometime at the ages of 4-5 and only recently has it been pushed back to 5-6. Maybe someday this continent will realize that there really is no "one size fits all" when it comes to the age a child is ready to start school.

K.
post #34 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by melissabb View Post
This may be so, and I am sure that there are homes like this. But, starting school at an earlier age is not an answer but a bandaid. These same kids if in school at age three are still going home to that neglectful house.

Perhaps instead of using tax dollars to fund earlier and earlier schooling we should make parenting classes mandatory. Let's face it...the kids aren't the ones screwed up it's usually us parents.

If you really want smart, compassionate and lovely children then starting with conception the parents need to have coping techiniques and resources to benefit their child BEFORE school starts.


Plus I think people take studies done on very at risk children (I.E. preschool is very beneficial) and apply it across the board. I truly believe my 3 yr old is learning more and better off in my care then in preschool. He gets read to more, the stories aren't disturbed by other kids. I can ask him questions and have long conversations with him. He is able to finish a task in his time frame not a schools. There is just no way I believe a "school" could teach him more at his age. Now that said I sent my DD to preschool (at age 4) which I'm still torn about and kindy this yr. I really think kindy has been great for her, but I'm not so sure preschool was needed or a benefit.
post #35 of 67
the most recent report i read (and can't find the link to) about the full time jk by 2010 in ontario said it's not mandatory.

it's optional. you can choose to put them in full time or part time or wait until age 6 (grade 1) to enroll them or don't enroll them at all and homeschool.

i think it's the government's way of dealing with the daycare issue.
post #36 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by limette View Post
the most recent report i read (and can't find the link to) about the full time jk by 2010 in ontario said it's not mandatory.

it's optional. you can choose to put them in full time or part time or wait until age 6 (grade 1) to enroll them or don't enroll them at all and homeschool.

i think it's the government's way of dealing with the daycare issue.
Yes, Limette, You are right that is isn't mandatory. However, most people know little about the law and have no idea that a child does not have to attend school until they are six years old.

Also, I agree that it is the governments way of dealing with daycare issues.

The simple fact is that the parents on this board are in the minority. These are parents who ask questions, research, are cynical etc. Unfortunately 90% of the population is not like this. They simply do what they are "told" to do or lead to believe is in the best interest of their child. Besides, most people whose children are in daycare are in love with the new FT program for 3/4 year olds as it saves them a whole year of daycare costs. Costs, I might add that are now being passed on to me as a taxpayer. So now, instead of paying for daycare for just the people on subsidy I will now pay it for each and every child who is 3/4 yrs old and attending FT school.

My worries are that the government will start slewing propaganda about the 'merits and benefits' of FT school for 3 and 4 year olds and is always the case, parents will jump on the band wagon without so much as taking five minutes to research the consequences themselves.

I don't see this as a good thing at all. But, I do see it as a given that it will come to fruition. Too many parents just follow along with the societal norm without ever giving a second thought as to why and what they are doing. If every child goes to school at 3/4 years old for the whole school day then you can bet your last dollar that in a few years no one will even question it at all. It will just be 'normal'.

Gosh, why don't we just deliver our kids and hand them right over to the state? Might as well.....if we continue on the course of 'academic one-up-man-ship' that we are on I have no doubt our children will suffer in the end.
post #37 of 67
I dunno, I don't think that just because someone puts their kids in school at an early age, or doesn't do it the way that MDC homeschoolers want them to do it, that they're uneducated, or worse parents.

Preschool was a blessing for us. DD started right after her 4th birthday, and she went full time. She started off part time, but she really enjoyed it, and I ended up putting her in full time, and she thrived. She is in kindy now, and I opted to keep her in private school this year, because the private school has a full-day program, as opposed to the public school, which is only a 2.5 hour program. I looked into every option before I made my decision, and weighed all the pros and cons heavily. But ultimately, I knew that the best choice for her was a full-day program, and she loves it, and even though it is a huge financial struggle to keep her there, it is worth the expense. She looks forward to going to school every day, and she is doing well. There is absolutely no way that we could homeschool. I considered it, but it would never work for us.

I don't know what kind of people you all seem to know, but the people that I know who put their kids in preschool do it not because they "have" to, but because they feel like it's the best decision for their kids. I've never met anyone who forced their kids to go to pre-k or even kindy when it was against their wishes. In fact, most of the parents that I know debated whether or not to start pre-k or even kindy with their kids.

Also, I dunno how old the OP was, but when I started kindergarten, I was 4. So I'm not sure when kids were starting school at 6 or 7.
post #38 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by grniys View Post
I'm totally not cool with mandatory schooling for 3 and 4 year olds.

BUT, I did enjoy my part time preschool. I started at age 3 and went until I was 5, and then I started full time K. I LOVED it. I always enjoyed school. But I realize that the needs of every child is different, and I absolutely do not agree with trying to force parent's to put their kids in school at such a young age. I think for some kids (like me) it's a good thing... if they're not getting enough attention or care at home, they could certainly thrive and excel and be around teacher's who will care about them. But for everyone? No.
Same here DD did so well in her preschool (there for speech issues) that when she "exited out" early I did consider puting her in head start but when I found out they'd pulled the part time 4 day a week 3.5 hour class to an all day 7 hour program we passed.

Deanna
post #39 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by mamabain View Post
You can't imagine how many families there are where children spend most of the day in the carseat, never spoken to, where there are no books at all, where there are no toys like puzzles, blocks, dolls, imaginative play, etc. These are the families and children that would benefit from FREE preschools so that their children get the stimulation needed to be able to learn to read, learn math, learn music at an appropriate age.
It's these families that these programs are focused on. So many kids are forced (isn't that an odd statement?) to sit quietly in front of the TV for 5 years in some home/daycare situations. Then they get to kindergarten and don't know very basic things. A quality daycare program would be 1000 times better than this. Making it required within public schooling would be a way to make it free. Parents would be able to opt out to the extent they can opt out of public schooling now.
post #40 of 67
The full-time non-mandatory JK (at 4yo or 3yo9mo if born in the fall) in Ontario started with the French school boards. A lot of kids come from families where English or another language is spoken at home and the idea was the give the children an extra year of "francisation", exposure to the French language full time.

I didn't know the English SBs were following suit. As far as I know, there is still no JK in public schools for English kids in my area.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Learning at School
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Childhood and Beyond › Education › Learning at School › Minimum schooling age getting lower and lower