DS and daycare

[Olive]

In an ideal world, kids will always get teachers who have the drive and resources to offer work that challenge s them. I know both dh and I were left unchallenged by school (some years), and either pretended to not get it, became class clown, disruptive or just skeptical of education in order to amuse ourselves. Other years, we had brilliant teachers.

Just one thing that is coming in to working out what to do. All my kids are born at start of the year, so we will have to do this a few times.

This was our concern too with DD1 as DH had similar issues at school, not challenged, but I've not once heard a parent say the regret sending a child older, only those who wished they'd started them later.

The resources are also limited when it comes to kids who struggle, I've got friends who's kids are struggling with reading, there is only do much more the school can offer/do.

ETA the other thing you will need to consider hot is that if your DD does another year of 4 yr old, it won't be funded, you'll have to pay the full fees out of pocket

[Lenny]

My DS is one month older than yours

He is not going to school next year, although he is in 4 year old kinder now. He will repeat 4 yo next year. He is getting funding because I just did the paperwork.

He has an older brother so in many ways he has an advantage in reading, social maturity, etc, blah blah. He has great gross motor and good fine motor skills.

The child I know right now is not ready for school. Even though it's a long way away, we had to apply prior to 9th May for funding for next year (early! Ridiculously so).

I look at the preps in class with my older DS. The ones who are coping are excelling. They have joy on their faces and they soak up all the learning that is on offer to them.

There are some that are not coping and in most cases they are the younger ones. They are still not happy and it's already well into term 2.

I read and read and read. I asked for advice. I really didn't know what to do. My research seems to suggest that the children who started a year earlier than the others were likely to score only fractionally lower when they finish up at school (so we are taking years later). They thing that was different was their attitude to school and schooling and their relationship to teachers etc.

Of course each child is different. It's so impossible for any of us to tell you what to do! But we can tell you what we did with our children in a similar situation and why.

[HotI]

We had an info evening last night, school does not require any knowledge of letters and numbers (maybe recognising own name), mainly what they need is social and emotional maturity and an interest in learning. So I can see how they can 'miss' that knowledge because they are not looking for it, it isn't considered one of the 'readiness' things, whereas what they have mentioned would be.

Oh I agree that the social emotional maturity is what they are looking for to determine readiness, but I would be surprised that carers looking after a child two days a week, in an educational setting, weren't aware of the child's maths/English skills.

[HotI]

This was our concern too with DD1 as DH had similar issues at school, not challenged, but I've not once heard a parent say the regret sending a child older, only those who wished they'd started them later.

The resources are also limited when it comes to kids who struggle, I've got friends who's kids are struggling with reading, there is only do much more the school can offer/do.

ETA the other thing you will need to consider hot is that if your DD does another year of 4 yr old, it won't be funded, you'll have to pay the full fees out of pocket

I also have heard similar regrets, from parents and the (grown) child too. if only i had a crystal ball.

The kinder field officer said that funding depends on the recommendation of the kinder staff. Funding can be available for a second year under certain circumstances.

[Olive]

It is but they must fill I think 3 categories, being not ready won't count I'm afraid, they'll really reigned in the funding

[Ca Plane Pour Moi]

This was our concern too with DD1 as DH had similar issues at school, not challenged, but I've not once heard a parent say the regret sending a child older, only those who wished they'd started them later.

My mum, with me. Although I started at 4, I concur it was too late. A lot of my friends were older and I'd have been better off up a year. (I also acknowledge I'm unusual, but I do exist.)

DS wasn't "school ready" in that he struggles sitting still. At age 7, he has a reading age of 7 and a maths age of 9+. Qudos to the teacher this year for encouraging his maths, while keeping up his reading and writing.

I personally think a lot of "school unreadiness" is pre-schools wanting more numbers, so more funds.

[HotI]

Actually, TFB reminded me, my Mum wished that couple of her kids had gone up a year due to being unchallenged at school. One of my (non-genetic) siblings would have benefitted from staying down a year.

i found this link on a 2nd year of funding, but will talk to the teacher to find out more. https://www.eduweb.vic.gov.au/edulib...ndergarten.pdf Thanks for pointing out it might not be easy.

[Miss.September]

We decided to give DD1 the extra year a few years back. We could see that she wasn't as emotionally mature as other kids she would be in the same class as. She turned five in March and will start school next year. Academically, she is ahead. A huge number of kids in her kinder year are already five. The ones who are not, you can see the massive difference. We have chosen a school that offers both recovery programs and extension programs.

We are completely confident with our decision to send her later. She has benefitted from the 15 hours of kinder , plus the 5 hours of three year old kinder she did last year.

Keep in mind that it's looking like the 15 hour kinder week is being cut back to 10 hours again, so it might have an impact on those making decisions for next year (especially if the child has already done 15 hours this year).

[wysiwyg]

I went to a session about school readiness this evening - and I was really quite amazed at how screwed up the system is - it sounds like going forwards due to the fact is now difficult to get more than one year of 4 year old kinder - that really they are asking parents to make a decision when the child is two. This doesn't affect me personally due to when my 2 are born - but this seems a totally ridiculous system - and also builds inequity, due to the financial constraints on staying home / and or paying for childcare. They were saying basically make your decision at 2 and stick with it (which was a bit at odds with the talk about various signs of readiness) - but at 2 as you clearly can not really tell - surely this is going to mean more people will opt for the deferment because is so difficult to get off the chain once you start into 3 year old kinder.

It really amazes me that at talks like the above - the financial implications of deciding when to start school are totally ignored - if it is as vital as is made out, to start when child is ready, then how come there is so little concern about the fact that for many families they really may not be able to go with deferment due to the financial implications.

Nothing was mentioned about the kinder week being cut back to 10 hours again though (no one asked the specific question though)- although like you say Miss S - it looks likely

[Ginger]

Honestly, I made the decision when ds2 was born and have stuck to it. Even if I thought he was ready before 3 yo kinder, I wouldn't have sent him.

[wysiwyg]

Honestly, I made the decision when ds2 was born and have stuck to it. Even if I thought he was ready before 3 yo kinder, I wouldn't have sent him.

If people are able to make that decision from when they are born, that is fair enough - but not everyone will be able to do that, and to me it seems rather unfair as it it disadvantages those who don't have the means to plan to be at home or pay for daycare. The presenter even said that the focus is very different depending on what suburb she is presenting in, which is hardly surprising really given the financial implications. I am not familiar with the reasons why they have made it so difficult for people to access a second year of funded four year old kinder - but to me it is a cost cutting measure which disadvantages the people who might well need it most. (The other bit I thought annoying was that it was suggested have a list of things that can do with your child instead of a 3 year old kinder year - and it was all paid (relatively expensive activities) - now I am hoping that is just due to where I live (and other areas suggest cheaper alternatives like playgroups etc) - but it also seemed at odds to me with the concept of play-based learning, and wanting to avoid overscheduling).

She was a good speaker though, and the list of maturity items that she went through was interesting (although I think if you have a child who has been in childcare for quite a while, children who are significantly younger than school age could pass the test (that doesn't mean I think they should go to school - but just that I think some of the things are just a matter of repeated exposure, rather than a definite sign of maturity). The session was run for free by the council (and sounds like is run by many councils) and I think is worth it if interested in the topic/need to make a decision.

[Lenny]

I know you'll hate me for it wysiwyg, but school is not a babysitting service and financially it might be better for someone to return to work one year earlier, but alternative arrangements should be made.

School is not a place for a child to go so a parent can work. That is selfish. Putting ones own immediate financial gain ahead of the pressure that an unready child puts on an already struggling school system. That child takes focus, time, and attention away from the other children. So to everyone else's detriment.

And I haven't even mentioned the emotional toll on the child itself.

Immediate family finances should never come into it.

[HotI]

Honestly, I made the decision when ds2 was born and have stuck to it. Even if I thought he was ready before 3 yo kinder, I wouldn't have sent him.

So your decision wasn't based on his readiness at all?

[wysiwyg]

I know you'll hate me for it wysiwyg, but school is not a babysitting service and financially it might be better for someone to return to work one year earlier, but alternative arrangements should be made.

School is not a place for a child to go so a parent can work. That is selfish. Putting ones own immediate financial gain ahead of the pressure that an unready child puts on an already struggling school system. That child takes focus, time, and attention away from the other children. So to everyone else's detriment.

And I haven't even mentioned the emotional toll on the child itself.

Immediate family finances should never come into it.

No 'hate' here -

My point is – the system is not encouraging people to make the right decision for their child.* Whether you like it or not, some people do require both parents to work – for survival of their family (please don’t someone mention just cut back on expenses – I am not talking about my situation, but in general society).* I am not suggesting people should send unready children to school – but many people can not afford to make the decision when that child is born, or when they are 2 to have an extra year of childcare fees (quite likely they will already be working prior to school return in some capacity) or at home just on the off chance that they might turn out not to be ready when they are 4/5.** If you have three children – that year for each of them can be a huge burden.* What should happen is people should be able to make the decision whether to have an extra year of 4 year old, when they are 4.* **Now according to the talk, this is what happened in the past (recent past included), everyone could, just based on parental choice really (I support parental choice) – but now maybe due to the demand for it due to parental choice it means that those who are potentially not ready (according to the talk – is only recognised documented developmental delays and issues that will be considered) – can’t access it due to the fact their parents couldn’t afford to not step onto the treadmill on the off chance that the child might not be ready.* The system favours the more affluent and disadvantages lower income earners.

*
I thought it most interesting that in the talk – it was mentioned about why we have such an ‘early’ school age.* It was apparently due to the war and women having to take over the jobs of men so school was somewhere for the children to go, I thought it interesting that the speaker didn’t consider the parallels of today where also women are moving back into the workforce (through necessity many of them) earlier.* **There is a big 'head in the sand' approach in my opinion to school starting age and affordable options prior to school.*** If school is not the appropriate place then affordable/accessible options should be provided (as is the case in all countries with late starting ages) for children earlier – if we want to avoid children who are not ready being sent to school.*** I can’t understand why instead of people looking at the system and what it is actually forcing people into doing – people are so ready to assume the worst of others – ‘using school as free babysitting service for their own financial gain’.


Now maybe my understanding on this is wrong but my DD is born end of May 2009 – so I have to send her to school next year right 2015?* They have to be enrolled in school the year they turn 6?* Given that the April cutoff date is arbitrary (apparently at one point they wanted to just make it calendar year based – like in Tassie, but politically this wasn’t conducive so they went with April)* - then what would happen if I felt that *she didn’t meet the readiness criteria?* (she does) but this bit I don’t understand – they have to be ‘ready’ because otherwise schools might have issues as outlined by Lenny in dealing with them, but you also have to meet the legal requirement – doesn’t the legal requirement also lead to students attending school who might not be quite ready and therefore schools are well versed in dealing with a range of maturity and skill levels in Foundation?

[~Kim~]

FWIW in NSW they don't even have a funded kinder system. Most preschools except council ones are private and the fees reflect that. Many childers don't go to preschool/kinder at all before starting formal schooling.

[Ginger]

So your decision wasn't based on his readiness at all?

No. My decision had absolutely nothing to do with his readiness.

[wysiwyg]

FWIW in NSW they don't even have a funded kinder system. Most preschools except council ones are private and the fees reflect that. Many childers don't go to preschool/kinder at all before starting formal schooling.

I wonder what effect that has on the entrance into school age? I know their cut off is different. I suspect if you compared ages of entry in VIC to NSW you would get far more Feb Mar April birthdays (so starting pre 5) going in NSW than in VIC.

You have to wonder why some states think is important enough to have funded 4 year old kinder, but others don't? Maybe Victoria will end up like that as is likely to go down to 10 hours anyway.

[HotI]

FWIW in NSW they don't even have a funded kinder system. Most preschools except council ones are private and the fees reflect that. Many childers don't go to preschool/kinder at all before starting formal schooling.

What are the fees? even with funding, 4 year old kinder is $300 a term.