Is Five Too Soon To Start School?
Do children start school at too young an age in England? Is childhood freedom being curtailed too soon?
Compared to most other western European countries, English pupils are extremely early
starters in the classroom.
While compulsory education begins in England at the age of five (with many children
actually starting at four), in countries such as Sweden, Denmark and Finland, school
doesn’t begin until the age of seven.
English children are ploughing through a fixed curriculum while their continental
counterparts are still ploughing up the kindergarten sandpit or playing at home.
But which system delivers the best results?
The young ones
| COMPULSORY SCHOOL AGE Five years old: England, Scotland, Wales, Malta, the Netherlands. Six years old: Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Seven years old: Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Latvia, Lithuania, Sweden, Poland. Source: NFER/Eurydice |
This far-reaching question has been raised by the Cambridge-based Primary Review which
is scrutinising how primary education is organised. And its conclusion challenges the idea
that an early start has long-term advantages.
“The assumption that an early starting age is beneficial for children’s later
attainment is not well supported in the research and therefore remains open to
question,” says the report.
So why do English schoolchildren start at five, when almost everyone else in Europe starts
later?
Apart from the Netherlands and Malta, the only other education systems beginning at five
are Scotland and Wales (with Northern Ireland even earlier at four).
The origin of such an early start, introduced in 1870, had little to do with education,
says the Primary Review report.
Entering full-time education at such a tender age meant reducing the malign influence of
Victorian feckless parents – it was about child protection and social conditioning
rather than learning.
And it was an attempt to appease suspicious employers, who were worried that starting any
later would remove their supply of juvenile workers. An early start meant an early school
leaving age.
Long hours culture
The result remains with us – and as a consequence one of the most distinctive
characteristics of English schoolchildren is how little time they spend with their family.
Children are full time in school up to three years earlier than in Scandinavia – and the
summer holidays in England and Wales are shorter than anywhere else in the European Union.
And the pressure on schools is now to become “extended schools” which would create an
even longer day, with optional activities before and after school hours.
But this is far from straightforward territory. If children were not in school, what would
be the impact on working parents? Long hours in childcare are already a reality for many
pre-school children.
Last year’s teachers’ conferences heard concerns that children were spending so little
time with their own families that they were showing signs of aggression and
de-socialisation, taking their behaviour from their peer group rather than absent adult
role models.
Less is more?
But what does it mean for education standards?
One of the most intriguing statistics from international comparisons is the lack of
relationship between hours in the classroom and educational achievement.
Finland, a global superstar in education terms, is consistently among the top performers.
But it is also at the very bottom of the league in terms of the hours spent in the
classroom.
Finnish pupils start formal education at seven and then enjoy 11-week summer holidays –
and they end up with the highest educational standards in Europe.
Poland, a rapid-climber in international education league tables and overtaking England at
reading skills, is also another country where pupils do not start until the age of seven.
Level playing field
There is another egalitarian argument for starting school early. Pupils from poorer
homes, with parents who are less able to help their learning, might be held behind if they
didn’t start lessons until six or seven.
But a rather sobering set of statistics published by the government earlier this year
showed that the length of time spent in school does little to level the playing field.
When pupils start school at five, the children of more affluent families are already
ahead. But this “attainment gap”, instead of closing, gets wider at each stage up to
the age of 16. As every year passes in school, the results of the richest and poorest grow
further apart.
There have been some other cross-winds of concern about children starting school before
they are ready. The government has highlighted summer-born children, whose parents could
now be given the right to delay entry by a year.
It followed research showing that the disadvantage of being the youngest in a year group
persisted right through primary and secondary school. While 60.7% of September-born girls
achieved five good GCSEs, only 55.2% of August-born girls achieved the same.
The Primary Review, taking an overview of the evidence, suggests that there is no clear
link between quantity and quality in education.
Or put another way, the early bird doesn’t necessarily become the bookworm.
Here is a selection of your many comments.
Starting school in a child’s fifth year is far too young. Children who are unable to even sit and listen to a story at age four are going to have a lot of problems with any structured learning activities. The UK should take a good look at other European systems, such as Finland’s, learn from them and devise some changes. Unfortunately, sending children to school as early as we do, is merely providing a creche for overworked parents at best, and giving the children a poor start in education at worst. We seem to treat school as a childminding service, not an education.
Sue, Wrexham
It’s a cultural thing, this country (Britain) being very anti-children, and we need to review our entire approach to how we accommodate children in everyday life. Yes, we start school too soon, and should be enjoying our children’s early years as much as possible, and reaping the benefits in the years that follow. We should work to live, not live to work.
Rupert, London
Having worked in a nursery and reception class, I feel starting school later would be much better for children. It is very sad that the adults working with these children end up spending more time with others’ children than their own family, and in some cases even know them better. I do not understand how any loving parent would not want to fight to keep their children at home longer, in a loving environment where their personalities can fully grow. I have seen fun, bright, children become the total opposite because they just were not ready for school.
Carrie, Salford, Manchester
My five year old is having a hard time spending so many hours at school and to make her go is a big problem every morning. I think children should start compulsory education later than 5 years old. I also disagree with the amount of hours they have to do a day, it is a big jump to go to nursery school for two and a half hours and then reception is a big jump of 6 and a half. My daughter is always tired and always looks forward to the weekend. She sounds like an adult tired from the week’s work. They will be sedentary, not social, maybe depressed or overweight, if they are not out there running and discovering and spending time with their families and friends.
Tania, London
I grew up in Sweden and started school at 7. As mentioned in the article, children in Sweden start at 6/7 years old (7 compulsory) but we also have to remember that their childcare/nursery is highly subsidised from the Swedish government with a nursery place costing about ?100 pounds per month, per child, which makes a significant difference to working parents.
Jo, Cheshire
I think that children do start school at an early age but as a working mother of two, I would then find childcare even more costly than I already do at the moment. On average I spend over ?7,500 on childcare a year. If the government was willing to help working mothers a bit more and introduce better childcare schemes, then let them introduce extra school holidays and later school starting age! If not helped with this aspect, they could find themselves with a lot more people out of work because it is just not cost effective to work and have children in this day and age!
Rachel, Caerphilly
I would have no concerns about children starting school older than the current 4 to 5, having shorter classroom hours and being able to actually enjoy their childhood for longer. However, I have absolutely no idea how I would manage the childcare implications. Like many other families, both myself and my husband have to work full time, so unless a Scandinavian-style change in the primary education system is accompanied by a similar enlightened change in attitudes to and support for childcare, I remain a working mother balancing work, my children, my marriage and the guilt of not doing as well as I would like for any of them!
Helen, Staffs
I do not come from this country, so when I was told my child had to start school (Devon) at 4.5 years, I was appalled. As we lived so far from the nearest school in Bovey Tracey, he was collected by a bus at 8:00 am and returned at 4:00 pm. An 8 hour day for most adults is arduous, let alone a baby who should still be at home with his mother and having afternoon naps. I did not start school until I was 6 or 7 and even then we only went a half day. Why can’t children be children rather than being shoved out into our regimented society at the age of four? I would happily have kept him home longer.
B Jones, Oxford
Take any group of young animals away from their parents, elephants, chimpanzees whatever, and voila – you have feral animals causing chaos and mayhem. Society needs to have a good think about things. The choices are materialism with all the ills that go with it, or a better life with nice people to live alongside.
K Lockwood, Bradford
I happily sent my daughter to the local school in Poland at the age of seven and a half. She couldn’t read and couldn’t write in English or Polish. However once they start in Poland, they start. Now nearly 10 she reads happily in English and Polish. I went at 5 in Scotland, learnt to read, but rarely read for pleasure. I think all the gold star “Jack and Jill” rubbish put me off early. It’s clear that the schools in the UK are a custodial service for 19th century factory workers. “A child is a fire to be lit not a vessel to be filled.”
Paul, Warsaw, Poland
So, we need to send our kids to school so we can go out and work. And those kids need a good education, so they can get a good job, and repeat the cycle. Message – money is more important than kids.
Darren, Cheltenham
Both my kids attend Finnish schools. It is true that kids in Finland start school at 7 but they also attend pre-school at 6 which is usually organised through daycare. Many children can read and do simple arithmetic before they attend school at 7. The norm in Finland is that both parents work and so kids are normally in daycare from the age of 3 and during this time there are professionals over-seeing the children and ensuring that they learn in a play environment. It should also be noted that Finland has a very high proportion of parents that have attended higher education, which likely plays a part in their own childrens’ development. These parents spend hours with their children in the evenings and at weekends working through huge amounts of homework. Finnish children might start formal schooling 2 years later than their UK peers and spend fewer hours in class but it’s worth remembering that there is a lot of learning/teaching done outside of classrooms here in Finland! The Finnish system would be very difficult to model in the UK, which anyway does not have the childcare model in place to cope.
Michael Hardy, Helsinki, Finland
My father was sent to boarding school at 4 in 1939, and I was sent to boarding school at 7 in 1982. That was considered normal by our parents and their peers. So I’m not really interested in what society or the government considers normal – I’d rather assess things from an individual, intelligent, emotional, humane point of view. My daughter’s an August baby – and sending her to school when she’s just turned 4 seems moronic and cruel. Just another reason I’m emigrating from this horrible country in May. The British seem to think that the answer to their decaying society is getting both parents in every family to work longer hours for more money. Good luck.
Rupert, London
My summer-born 4-year-old son goes to a public nursery school in the afternoons and absolutely loves it, even his homework. His reading, writing and math skills have come on no-end, and he gets help at home with everything as well. He’s one of the brightest in his class, according to his teacher, and we’re looking forward to him starting “full time” in a few months. Right now, we’ve no problem with him spending 6 hours a day getting an education to set him right for the rest of his life.
Craig, Nottingham
In France, children start school at three years old (although it is not compulsory until six years old). A comparison between my daughter (educated in France) and her cousin (in the UK) at exactly 4 yrs 9 1/2 months old showed that a British education gives kids the tools they need to read and write much more quickly.
Sarah, Apt, France
Here in Austria, children start school at 6/7 and have 12 weeks summer holidays like Sweden. However, as somebody who works with pre-school children (aged 3–7) I think you cannot make generalisations about children starting either earlier or later. I have some children that are able to start doing reading at the age of 3 but have to wait around in Kindergarten for 4 years before they are given the opportunity to develop further in school. My parents-in-law purposely held back their youngest son to start school at 7 and I know it’s a decision that they regret, as he is now underchallenged in school. The grass is never absolutely greener on the other side.
Catherine, Vienna, Austria
As a teacher in an underprivileged school, I can say most students are actually better off the longer they stay in school. Parents with long hours in poorer communities cannot provide adequate supervision at all times. After school activities decrease the students participation in violence and use of drugs. Unfortunately in some cases, the teachers are the adult role model that is healthiest for the child.
Kristen, Knoxville Tn, USA
I live in Sweden and there are many good things for parents and kids and some things that are more of a problem.
1. Childcare is cheap, ie, subsidised (I pay ?180 per month for 2 kids).
2. We get 14 months parental leave at 80% pay which is shared (2 months reserved for mum
and for dad, the rest you split as you like). Most parents make this stretch to 18 months
by taking less pay, so kids start daycare much later than in the UK.
3. All parents of children under 8 have the right to work 80% on a full time post (for 80%
pay). This is meant to create more equality between mum and dad which is good. In reality,
while many mums work 80%, the vast majority of dads work full time. One consequence is
that there are hardly any half time jobs or job shares. The expectation is absolutely that
both parents will have a full time job as their norm. So starting school later doesn’t
mean kids are with their families more.
4. School starts at 6 for 99.5% of kids who attend the voluntary reception year (there is
no other childcare for 6-year-olds available). There is no expectation that kids will
learn to read or write before this.
Is this good or bad? Kids are individuals! Your kid and my kid may love learning early or it may create feelings of failure. But is it really important for 4-5 year olds to be able to read? The important thing is that kids are stimulated mentally and physically and learn good social skills. When they start to learn to read at 7 – well they just learn faster! So why inflict the sense of failure on those that aren’t ready to read! There are other equally valuable forms of stimulation.
Katherine, Stockholm, Sweden
Being an August baby, my son was barely four when he started school – he was much too young, not developmentally ready to be launched into formal learning and still needing to play and be a little boy. I phoned the education authority to ask if I could hold him back a year (it was a matter of being a few days short of the cut-off), but was told categorically no. Consequently, I always feel he started school on a back foot and has been disadvantaged ever since.
KF, London
Full-time education is not mandatory until 6 but is certainly the norm here as young as 2. My son loves school, is bi-lingual, eats really healthy school lunches including thing such as calamari, fruit everyday and is slowly learning to write and read. He has music, PE and has swimming lessons in the school’s pool.
Stacey, Barcelona
It’s on dodgy ground in PC-terms to say this, but I’m going to anyway... I firmly believe that the discrepancy between richer and poorer kids’ grades is nothing to do with money. The money is merely an indicator of well-educated, caring, conscientious parents. In broad terms, a richer modern household is comprised of better educated parents who spend more time and give more priority to supporting their child’s learning. It has little to do with money, and everything to do with the fact that if a child comes from “good stock” they will be a good child... There are exceptions to prove the rule, and my exceptional but certainly not affluent ex-miner parents are a testament to that. I credit them with my success.
Dan Mann, Bristol
Here we go again! It is too early, I send them but my heart bleeds for my angel versus
we have to both work and all can blame the classroom for the woes. As someone who is
intimately connected to the early years system, the truth (heaven forbid we should ever
get this) is that many children arrive at 4, they are not compelled to attend until the
year in which they are 5 and do not know how to socially interact as their overindulgent
parents are too busy to teach them, nor do they know how to say “please” or “thank
you”; another great British tradition that is being lost.
Therefore, the schools spend an inordinate amount of time educating these ‘angels’ in
basic manners and social interaction, not to mention toilet training to establish any
basis for formal education. There is a quantum shift needed to our system and that is seen
in the Finnish, French and other nations where respect and community still forms part of
the social fabric of the country; rather than the self interest and blame others for your
shortcomings of this once world leader.
James, Lincoln
It’s simple, it’s a necessity for both parents to work, so getting your kid into education early helps you get back to work. Clearly if there’s no tangible advantage for being at school earlier and longer then I would suggest the problem is about what’s actually going on in the classroom.
Martin, London