School starting age, please advise

shirlgirl2004

balletshoes wrote: »

oh I absolutely agree with you, but the point is that the teacher was not, and not expected to, teach all the children in the class at the level of the least able child (or lowest common denominator).

No but there will often be children whose needs aren't met.

In all likely hood as the OPs child is already reading then she isn't going to be near the bottom of the Year 1 group anyway. Obviously some people believe that children can only learn if they go to school but any interested parent can teach their child at home. It is surprising how many people ask me if I have an previous experience of working in education. Sorry to disappoint them but primary school work isn't rocket science.

Torry_Quine

shirlgirl2004 wrote: »

No but there will often be children whose needs aren't met.

In all likely hood as the OPs child is already reading then she isn't going to be near the bottom of the Year 1 group anyway. Obviously some people believe that children can only learn if they go to school but any interested parent can teach their child at home. It is surprising how many people think ask me if I have an previous experience of working in education. Sorry to disappoint them but primary school work isn't rocket science.

I started school at 4 1/2 and could already read and had never been to nursery or play group so you're right learning should begin in the home.

Off topic just wondered why schools in England are late in breaking up this year as this is the end of the third week of holidays here and you are normally two weeks behind.

mumps

I think people are being a bit judgemental. I don't think missing reception is that big a deal, in fact my DD missed reception, year 1, year 2 and year 3. She had lots of fun and did a bit of work and started school ahead of the 58 children in her year group, not my opinion but what I was told by teacher who assessed her when she started. I am sure she would have done well at school, maybe a bit better but maybe a bit worse but she was bright and motivated and she would have been fine. If the OP's daughter is bright and already reading she will be. Good luck OP, I am sure it will be OK whatever you decide.

mumps

pigpen wrote: »

That's is wholly incorrect. Teachers and classes cater for a wide range of needs and abilities. Our primary has 17-20% non-english speaking children, 16% SEN and they all do just fine.. noone is held back they teach the core subjects in ability groups.. they children are graded by ability and given work appropriate to the level they are working at. the ones who need more help have a teaching assistant sat with them and the teacher gos round the whole class helping where needed.

In a group of 30 children there are 6 different groups for literacy and numeracy at our primary.. noone is held back..

this is the way teachers are taught to teach (judging by the number of teachers I know.. friends and family) It is more than their job is worth to not encourage more able pupils.

I have only once come across a teacher who 'catered for the mid-range pupils' .. she had my very bright DS1 helping the less able children with their reading at 5!!! She then had the gall to complain to me when he became bored and disruptive.. he didn't get to year 1 at that school.

My daughter had one teacher who told her she was a nuisance because she found maths easy and completed her worksheets too quickly. If I had known more about primary schools she would have missed years 4,5 and 6 as well.

jellyhead

Spendless wrote: »

My son's is a large year (millennium babies!) and I felt it was more beneficial to him to have got used to chopping and changing kids each year, rather than have the same 29ish children from Reception to yr 6 (I had no intention of ever moving from the area).

This is off topic (sorry soniclord!) but our school has 2 or 3 classes in each year group yet they keep them as whole classes when they move up to a new teacher each year.

They used to chop and change when my eldest was in primary, but now they don't. My son has stayed with the same kids in reception and year 1 and they are going into year 2 together. I don't know about KS2 though.

jellyhead

Soniclord wrote: »

By the way can't you read?? She wouldn't be going into Reception she'd go straight into Year 1, so if all the traveller kids went into Reception it wouldn't matter! Eejit!

There are government rules about class sizes (for reception and years 1 and 2 - they can be bigger for years 3-6) and the maximum is 30. So, if a bunch of new kids filled up the reception class and everyone stayed for year 1, there wouldn't be room for your daughter.

I know people who have had to wait until year 3 to get their kid into the school of their choice, because year 3 is when they allow bigger class sizes.

From what you've said about talking to the school though it sounds like there are a few places and it's not a tight squeeze as it would be if you were trying to get into the primary my son goes to, for example.

Best of luck, it sounds like it will work out fine for you and your family

plumpmouse

I have to admit one of my gripes is when people post things and the responses are very harsh from other posters.

However my initial reaction was like others "how can you possibly not know".

I understand that you feel "attacked" by the posters who said similiar to the above but I too find your replies in this thread to be awful.

You come across as very rude. Despite not knowing about the schooling system you have been aggressive and rude to anyone who has dared to offer advice that doesn't suit!

The use of "idiot", "stupid", "scum" and even "sweatpea" in the manner you have is in my opinion disgraceful. You clearly cannot express yourself and views with putting down everyone around you who doesn't agree!

Thank you for your post And I agree if a bunch of new kids filled up the reception class then my daughter wouldn't get a place, but I have contacted the school, applied for a place and have been told I should get 1 and that it should be 'OK' to defer it for a year

Should be "OK". Good luck with that!!!

iamana1ias

Perhaps your genius daughter will be able to teach you the correct uses of the words we discussed earlier.

msb5262

Lots of posters on this thread seem to feel that the reception year in school is without academic value.

In my opinion, the main value of the reception year is in socialising the children.

Whatever kind of background children come from, they generally benefit enormously from spending time with other children of a similar age, taking part in group activities at a level which will offer them interest, challenge and the opportunity to develop intellectually.

Anyone who looks at schooling from a purely academic standpoint is missing much of its intrinsic value.

I must say also that the rude and abrupt tone of the OP on this thread makes me feel somewhat despairing about parents.

Teachers are often blamed for children lacking manners, but this parent takes the biscuit!

MsB

Soniclord

moomoomama27 wrote: »

Wow! What an incredibly rude and angry person you appear to be.

Oh well. If someone comes on here and tries to tell me what I should and shouldn't be doing with my kids and expecting me to follow in there exact footsteps they're wrong! Dead wrong!

moomoomama27 wrote: »

I would think it important for your child to go to school ASAP to learn some manners and how to use self control, because she clearly won't get taught that by you!

Oh I have manners. Let's not beat around the bush on that one! But I will NOT and refuse to do as others do and just accept there opinion as the gospel! I am entitled to my opinion and that is the end of that!

plumpmouse wrote: »

I understand that you feel "attacked" by the posters who said similiar to the above but I too find your replies in this thread to be awful.

Awful? I don't think so, if people haven't got enough of a backbone to take on board what I say then that's not my problem.

plumpmouse wrote: »

You come across as very rude. Despite not knowing about the schooling system you have been aggressive and rude to anyone who has dared to offer advice that doesn't suit!

WRONG! I have responded to the idiots that have wanted me to or felt I should go with the 'norm' and send her anyway no matter what the cost! And as others have posted it would NOT be beneficial at all to get both kids out of bed at 6:30am to get 2 buses 1 to town and 1 to the village where the school is when there is an alternative. LIke it or lump it that's how it is and it won't change because some jumped up little idiots who preach about what great parents they are just because they sent their kids to school at 4 instead of 5! AND LIKE I SAID I HAVE NOT NOR AM I DOING ANYTHING I'M NOT ALLOWED TO DO! And if deferring for a year was sooooooooo bad it wouldn't be allowed, so for gods sake why don't you and all the other idiots realise that!!

plumpmouse wrote: »

The use of "idiot", "stupid", "scum" and even "sweatpea" in the manner you have is in my opinion disgraceful.

That's your opinion..

plumpmouse wrote: »

You clearly cannot express yourself and views with putting down everyone around you who doesn't agree!

Wrong again. I don't have to justify myself to you.

Right.... 'OK'

iamana1ias wrote: »

Perhaps your genius daughter will be able to teach you the correct uses of the words we discussed earlier.

Maybe, I'll ask

msb5262 wrote: »

I must say also that the rude and abrupt tone of the OP on this thread makes me feel somewhat despairing about parents.

Oh well, you'll live I'm sure.

msb5262 wrote: »

Teachers are often blamed for children lacking manners, but this parent takes the biscuit!

I actually ate them all, so unfortunately there is none left to take. Sorry!