I personally don't like that it is not straight forward, as it does cause all the early vs late nonsense, as opposed to on time. Talking to the teachers locally, they would prefer a straight, "if you turn xx during the calendar year, then you start"
Moderator
I personally don't like that it is not straight forward, as it does cause all the early vs late nonsense, as opposed to on time. Talking to the teachers locally, they would prefer a straight, "if you turn xx during the calendar year, then you start"
Registered User
I agree Astrid. My brother says he had to repeat kinder. He didn't he was an April baby and Mum preferred that he started school older. So he just did 2 years of kinder (not as much childcare 30 years ago). It is sad that he feels he has to say that he repeated kinder.
I think their should be a set rule for all states.
Registered User
I intend to listen to the podcast tonight once the kids are in bed, but I find the debate of when to start school very interesting. My case is slightly unusual, in that I have twins and (I feel) one is ready and the other is not for starting school in 2013. However I have decided I cannot hold girltwin back as she has been ready for a year now, and I cannot split them up, so they are both starting a week after they turn 5. The school has said they are both ready, the daycare agrees, it's only me who would prefer to hold boytwin back and being January babies I definitely would if it were not for his sister.
Registered User
Traveller - do you have any insights on the UK system? or get asked the question about the older starting age here (I will stop saying 'later')?
There is someone on here who is returning from UK whose child has been in school for a year over there and then starting here isn't there? Wish I could remember who - would be interested in hearing their perspective - nothing will change when my two will start but I would like to be able to give a decent explanation to people from UK when ask. Especially my mum - who thinks for DD we should move back so she could do a year and then come back for her to start school here in 2015 (something we will not be doing!). She worked in a nursery school ( a bit like daycare) in the UK and so has a good understanding of early years and school in UK - but none over here and doesn't really 'see' the massive jump from day care to school people talk about and as in UK you go when you go there isn't really a concept of 'readiness' for most school environments - and her reflections of my brother maybe doing better starting later are really only in hindsight and it might not have made any difference anyway.
Registered User
DS1 started school in Scotland before we moved here and over there it's much more intense from the get go. Academically he made bigger leaps in P1 in Scotland than he did in Prep, but I like the slow start the kids get here. Hopefully it means they won't burn out by the time they get to high school.
2014 BellyBelly RAK Recipient.
ok, so I've watched it now, and whilst you are entitled to your opinion Ali, I don't think the retired principal with 36 years experience was all "BS". Whilst I can see both sides of the story and their reasoning behind it, I think it is a decision that only a parent can make based on the fact that really, they are the only ones who truly *know* their child, moreso, than any teacher ever will. The only thing I disagreed with was the Mum who said, well, they can always stay back and repeat if it's too hard. That, to me, is worse than keeping them at home another year. They've made their friends, formed bonds with them, then that is taken away from them and they have the added stigma of being the one that "stayed down". I would rather keep my child home another year, than subject them to that kind of ridicule. And before anyone jumps up and down, yes, I am fully aware that this could happen at anytime during their schooling years, however, if you believe what the principal said, then it is usually within the first 2-3yrs of schooling life.
I should also say, that my older sister and 3 of my best friends are all primary school teachers here in Vic, and from *their* point of view, there have been just as many kids pass through their classrooms who really would have benefited from starting school later as those who were older and still had issues. So, as with anything, there will always be arguments to support your point of view.
I still don't know what I am going to do with my DD, but I know I will have her assessed in term 3 for school readiness as well as spending time doing parent helper stuff at kinder so I can also see, firsthand, what she is like.
*Snap* EJ!
ETA: for those who can, check out the "Extra Minutes" interview with the Principal on the 60mins website (not sure if they have the full segment for the pp who asked). He went into to it a bit more, about cognitive readiness which was quite interesting. He also gave reference to schools having to meet certain expectations (eg: Naplan)
Registered User
The whole segment was on chronological age being the deciding point between success or not at school. That is the BS.
The principal said that the gap between the low achievers and the rest of the cohort is dangerous (cant quote his exact words). This I agree with. However, the children who are falling into that dangerous bracket are not necessarily all the young ones n the year group. It would be a mix of children.
I am glad to read that many people in this thread are basing their decisions on whether their child is socially ready for school and has the maturity to cope with school rather than basing it on 'well they will be chronologically older than other children so will do better' attitude (which was shown on 60minutes last night).
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks