Starting School at 5 Years

funky_snow

Ok this is a while back but I saw 2 sides of the system with my upbringing. UK system - early to school but teachers teach everything versus Europe - later to school but the expectation is that kids know their alphabet/numbers/listen to teacher.

If your kids are going to have quality time not at school but by learning and interacting with you then I think its a good option. If they are in a nursery with younger kids or don't interact much with other children then I would put them into school earlier. The friendship thing - really depends on the personality of your kids and how they've been brought up. If they are confident little people then they will probably be fine going later. If they are very introverted and clingy then it may be worth getting them used to the idea sooner rather than later.

I know things are very different now in schools with targets and achievements but an education is so much more than school - its what you are giving children their whole life to prepare them for growing up. As a mum if you can be happy that their time with you is richer, then you are free to do that till the legal age when they have to be in school.

ps. you had some very specific questions about classes and likelihood of getting a place. I would actually contact the schools directly and ask this. Maybe a quick letter or phonecall?

squashy

At our school we would not hold a place. All the reception places would be allocated accordingly to those starting at that time (we only have one intake, in September, for children aged 4). Anyone wanting to join this cohort the following year would have to take their chances and hope that a place was available in the Y1 class, which may only happen if someone leaves the school/class in the summer.

Different schools may vary but I would be surprised if many would hold a place for very long as the school would lose out on funding.

my_gorgeous_ellie-belle

Oh, my understanding was those born after easter, but before 1st sept only went into school until about 12 midday for the first two terms. Then full school day for the last summer term of reception year!

I thought this was what we'd expect for our DD who turned 3 back in May. She starts next sept!

If that is the way at least you'll still kind of have him for that extra year but he'll still get to make his friends and get used to school routines.

I suppose someone more knowledgable can advise on that front - i am sure that is what i read on our local authority website.

Rummer

Although it is child dependant I think children should start school when they are a bit older, there is too much pressure on children at a young age and an extra year of maturing and learning through play if often better for them than starting school too young.

chivers1977

My son is a June birthday and started this September. He was half day for 3 wks, stayed for lunch for 1 and then full time. It has been very tiring for him esp as he now has to go to breakfast and afterschool clubs (which he loves) as well. However it is definitely the right thing for him. They are learning phonics which I think that your child would miss all of the games that they play to learn the sounds. At 2.5 you think that your child will be the baby forever but all of a sudden, when they are about 3.5 they start being much more "boy-like" and they want to go to school. My son would have been devastated if he had had to stay at day nursery in September while all of his friends went off to school. There were lots of Nov birthday children whose parents were very disappointed to have missed the cut off as they felt that the nursery had really prepared them well and that they were ready

Sarahlou_2

my_gorgeous_ellie-belle wrote: »

Oh, my understanding was those born after easter, but before 1st sept only went into school until about 12 midday for the first two terms. Then full school day for the last summer term of reception year!

I thought this was what we'd expect for our DD who turned 3 back in May. She starts next sept!

If that is the way at least you'll still kind of have him for that extra year but he'll still get to make his friends and get used to school routines.

I suppose someone more knowledgable can advise on that front - i am sure that is what i read on our local authority website.

Think it's different everywhere.....my DS went to Foundation Stage from 3 years old, 9am until 3.15pm. Now in Reception. Would never have kept him back until 5, he's too bright and gets too frustrated ( = mischevious! :rotfl:)

Janepig

daska wrote: »

On the other hand, if he starts school you get a period where you can spend plenty of one to one time with his sister which she will surely benefit from. Every silver lining has a cloud!

That......... is a very good point. I always felt that DS missed out by being the youngest and didn't have the time with me (and DH) that DD did - she's two and a half years older than him. So it was quite nice when she went to school that me and him could have some time together, just the two of us.

I'm another one voting for you to send him (surprise surprise) earlier rather than holding him back. It is only playing and getting used to being in a school environment - the way some people go on about how they do things in Europe you'd swear our children were chained to a desk from the age of 3 chanting their times tables!! However, in my experience they do start to do a bit more "work" in year 1 and alot of the fun is over, although it varies from school to school, so it may be a bit of a shocker for him to go straight into year 1. I think reception gives them a more gentle introduction to the ways of the school. And my DS (and DD before that) went full time at 3 to the nursery class at their primary school, a two year introduction to it!

You may also want to ask if they split the year (depending on how many children there are) into younger and older. Although ours only has the one intake in September (which imo is better), they do split the year into older and younger children - DS is in the older half, DD was in the younger, and I think that works well as at this age there is a big difference in the older and younger children in the class.

Jxx

Janepig

my_gorgeous_ellie-belle wrote: »

Oh, my understanding was those born after easter, but before 1st sept only went into school until about 12 midday for the first two terms. Then full school day for the last summer term of reception year!

I thought this was what we'd expect for our DD who turned 3 back in May. She starts next sept!

If that is the way at least you'll still kind of have him for that extra year but he'll still get to make his friends and get used to school routines.

I suppose someone more knowledgable can advise on that front - i am sure that is what i read on our local authority website.

It really does vary from school to school - in my LEA there are some that do full-time at 3, only one intake in September, there are others that do part time, staggered intakes, etc... There are some with nursery units, and others that only start with reception. The LEA tried to force DD and DS's school to do a full-time/part-time staggered entry mix for the nursery class afew years ago and you'd have had to have been a Californian lawyer to work out who was starting when and what hours!! Parents were up in arms and the LEA backed off.

Jxx

Lunar_Eclipse

Christie_L wrote: »

If I delay sending my son to school until he's 5 years old (he's 2.5 at the moment), will he be placed in a class with younger, 4 year old children who are just starting, or will he be placed in year 2 (if that's how it works... )??

Also I am less likely to be offered a place at my preferred school (which is a 5 min walk) because he's missed the normal intake at 4 years old?

No to the first part; he will be put in the right year for his age (ie Y1.)

Potentially yes to the second though. If your preferred school is over-subscribed, think very carefully about delaying his entry. I haven't heard of schools holding a place for anyone (I know ours won't), so if they are full there could be no space for him to join when you would like him to.

Lunar_Eclipse

Christie_L wrote: »

The reason I'm considering not sending him into formal state education until he's 5 is that I intend to be a SAHM until his sister (currently 11 months old) is old enough to enter the school system when she's 4. Then it's my plan to go back to work full time.

Whilst I understand your logic about having him at home with you, I would definitely send him at 4 instead of 5. Besides the social (& academic) reasons already mentioned on this thread, it should be far less stressful going back to FT employment with only one child starting school and having the other already settled. Furthermore, he should then have friends, which become a social life for him and support network for you, having returned to work.

Both children starting school with you returning to work is a lot of change in one go. Additionally you mentioned returning full time, which implies childcare of some description; yet another change. I would try to minimise the change, thus staggering the school starting dates of both my children.

Just my opinion though.