English children 'start school too young and are tested harder than anywhere else in the world'
English primary schools are “uniquely obsessed” with tests, experts found after research taking in 21 countries. English children start school too young and are tested longer and harder than anywhere else in the world, according to an influential new report.
Primary schools in England are more obsessed with tests than in 20 other countries and pupils still perform no better than their European counterparts.
Researchers from the Cambridge University-led Primary Review also found that English children find school “stressful” as they are subjected to academic lessons in maths and English at the age of four. But in countries such as Sweden and Finland, where children do not start education until seven, they outperform English pupils by the age of 11.
Research spanning 21 nations including Germany, Italy, Spain, the US and South Korea found that England was ‘uniquely’ obsessed with high pressure exams. Children here also attend larger schools than counterparts in many other nations following a reduction in the number of primaries by 3,000 over the past 40 years. The report added that other distinct features of the English system included a national obsession with exam standards. Primary pupils were given baseline assessments at age five, followed by national tests at seven and 11 and optional tests at eight, nine and ten.
“What distinguishes assessment policy in England is the degree to which it is used as a tool to control what is taught, to police how well it is taught, and to encourage parents to use assessment information to select schools for their children,” the report said.
“England is unusual in its high incidence of assessment and is exceptional in its emphasis on statutory external standard assessment for children at ages seven and eleven.”
Testing in England “begins at a younger age” than in other countries, the report added. It said: “In summary, formal assessment in England, compared to our review countries, is pervasive, highly consequential, and taken by officialdom to portray objectively the actual quality of primary education in schools.”
England also goes further than other rich nations in promoting multi-culturalism to its young children. It found the primary school curriculum was far more likely to promote “pluralism” over a shared national identity.
Critics yesterday urged ministers to allow teachers to instil shared values among pupils as they branded multi-culturalism a failed and “dangerous” dogma.
The report said: “Another key difference is in the handling of culture, difference and identity. England’s official curriculum documentation emphasises pluralism, diversity, tolerance and multi-culturalism. In many other countries these are given relatively little emphasis than common values and shared national identity.
The researchers, commissioned by the biggest inquiry into primary education for 40 years, found in that in France, for example, primary school pupils are taught to “adhere to republican principles of equal opportunity and effective integration into French society.” Meanwhile Japan places a strong emphasis on teaching “the traditions and culture of Japan”.
England was “more tentative and cautious” than either France or Japan in its promotion of common values. France “does not recognise difference in the way England does”, it added.
Ministers are attempting to get schools to teach British values such as tolerance and freedom of speech through revamped citizenship lessons being introduced later this year. But Douglas Carswell, Tory MP and member of the Commons schools committee, said: “My view is there is something deeply and profoundly wrong with the way the curriculum is taught. Politicians witter on about inculcating a sense of civic pride and identity but fail to understand a sense of identity is absorbed rather than taught by rote. Multi-culturalism is a failed dogma from the past and is dangerous because it emphasises separateness and allows people to tolerate outrageous abuses which are unacceptable in our society. Unelected technocrats are in control of the national curriculum. It tends to attract politically-correct quangocrats who impose a series of assumptions about the world that are totally out of keeping with most parents’ views.”
The report, produced by Kathy Hall, from National University of Ireland in Cork, and Kamil Ozerk, from the University of Oslo, revealed that England was unique in requiring schools to take account of pupils’ religious or cultural beliefs when designing lessons or even using “particular types of equipment, particularly in science, design and technology, ICT and art and design.”
The country was also less likely than some other nations to prioritise language skills over other subjects in the first few years of education. Surprisingly, we devote more time to teaching IT than Japan.
A separate report for the Primary Review, from Anna Riggall and Caroline Sharp at the National Centre for Educational Research, questioned whether pupils start school too young.
Legally children must be in full-time schooling the term after they turn five in England, “although most children actually start school at age four”, they said.
The study said: “The assumption that an early school starting age is beneficial for children’s later attainment is not well supported in the research and therefore remains open to question.”
Comments
Unbelievably, nothing will change!
John, Witney UK
With the real irony being that when they leave school, they still can’t read or write properly. Surely this must say something?
Jo H, London, UK
It’s a disgrace. We rob our children of their childhood and heap unnecessary stress on them from a young age. Young children should be playing, socialising, discovering and being happy. It’s unusual to see sand and water play, imaginative play every day like we had when I was in the infants. We did some reading and writing in the mornings and sewing, painting or different topics in the afternoon. My children do not have the happiness I had at school. I’ve refused to push my son with homework and reading etc at home. He is 71/2 and he’s now ready and doing really well. He’d have only just started school if we lived somewhere else in Europe. All this fuss about four year olds reading and formal education is shocking. The majority of children are not ready to read so young. Evidence from other countries shouldn’t be ignored.
Louise, Leicestershire
My children have been educated in France and started at the age of three. The French system is extremely harsh and far harder than the UK system. My son moved to the UK for school at 16 and thought he had died and gone to heaven it was so easy!
Lesley, Nice, France
Children in the UK aren’t tested from a younger age than in any other country. They’ve actually got it quite easy. I lived and grew up in Malta and from Year 1 (aged 4/5) I had homework everyday for 5 different subjects and half-yearly and end of year exams. Same for secondary school I studied 12 different subjects all with daily homework, projects and exams. Never did me any harm, they should try that here.
Diana Ellul Grech, St. Albans, England
That is true. e.g. in Finland and Sweden where children start school at the age of seven, they achieve very high literacy standards. After secondary school a vast majority of pupils go to further education; academic or vocational. High percentage choose going to university and become extremely highly educated. So what are they waiting for in England?
Annikka, London
All children are different and education should take that into account. My youngest, who is nearly 3, loves letters and numbers and practically teaches himself. My eldest, who is 41/2, struggles (he has Asperger’s and some learning difficulties). I don’t see the point in testing children at such a young age as it could be used to pigeon hole children’s abilities before they have a chance to develop. Some children are late bloomers, i.e. Albert Einstein. Also, what about creative thinking? Where does that fit in?
M, Bedford
I didn’t start to read until I was nearly 6 and it did me no harm as I learned fast – and enjoyed it. Until then one was just getting on with childhood by having fun – which is as it should be. You can’t put a price on a happy childhood – and how can any child be happy under the stress of endless testing?
Sarah, Brussels
My youngest son started school last summer at the age of 6. He could have started one year earlier but at the time he showed no interest in reading, writing etc. and we decided to give him an extra year in kindergarten to enjoy playing outdoors etc. Experience from his older siblings has taught me that although the first year at school is still quite playful, it gets really hard after that. My son loves school now, he makes great progress and he works with great determination and concentration. His teacher is full of praise but I don`t think this would have been the case had he started at the age of 5.
Caterine, Germany
The class size is important as is discipline. Can our youngsters sit still for more than 5 minutes? Schools need to be happy places for learning to occur. Why the obsession with tests at such a young age?
Dr. Nick Ashley, Huntingdon England
We have retired to France, I thought at first it would be great to have our daughter and granddaughters here but after learning more about the system I would not wish it: too strict, too narrow minded too obsessed with ‘tradition’. Okay the kids seem a little better behaved, but are reared to ‘conform to the French norm’ and are quite stunted in their outlook. However, my grandchildren are fortunate in attending a wonderful village school, don’t know what will happen when it’s time for secondary, however talking on the phone recently the 7 year old was doing homework which was unheard of with my daughter at junior school, who went on to comprehensive, university a 2–1 and an MA as well as professional qualifications. Why push the little ones so hard? Children don’t seem to have a childhood any more; it’s too much too soon in every way, too much information about things children shouldn’t have to be concerned about. I place this all at the door of the left wing of the society we now have.