The other day my lovely bride sent me this link to a BBC article discussing the optimal age children should start school. Apparently children in Britain start school at 5 years of age whereas children in other European countries often start at about 7. In the US children start first grade at 6 years old, but are almost always in Kindergarten at 5 years and many children are in "pre-school" even earlier than that.The main point of the article is to question this practice of early enrollment because, as the article quotes from a Cambridge report on education: "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."
The cited report suggests that the origins of early enrollment had little to do with education at all. In fact... "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." In other words, the British government didn't trust parents to raise their own children and used the education system as a surrogate family where children would be raised in an acceptable manner.
I also like this paragraph from the article:
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.One of the pro-public education arguments I usually hear is about how school helps children learn social skills that they wouldn't otherwise learn. This has seemed silly to me for some years now as we've been organizing our homeschool for exactly the reason discussed in the above paragraph. I love it when our kids have the chance to play with friends, family and peers, but if time with their peer group so dominates their social experience that it began to exclude time with us, then I would be very concerned.
I think this happens a lot in public schools. Kids spend most of their day in classes, they often have several after school activities and then they have homework to complete before the next day. The result often means surprisingly little time spent with family, which can result in estrangement from parents and an over reliance on the peer group as a source of social identity.
Basically, I think friends are great and necessary, but I think family is the best source of social identity. And, I think that building that social identity in the best and most positive way requires lots and lots of time with family. I'm not much of a believer in "quality time". I'm all about quantity.
Overall it's an interesting article. I also enjoyed the many comments from readers sharing their thoughts on the subject.
3 comments:
Great post, and an interesting article. Some of the comments after the article are pretty heart-wrenching. I believe homeschooling is legal in the UK... I don't know why unhappy parents of unhappy kids don't consider it as an option (if only to say "we can't do it because....").
A "peer group" at school is not at all the same as a group of friends. It's more of a mob mentality. Like when one kid is getting picked on, and most of the onlookers don't like it, but they dare not defend the victim. This kind of large peer group is hard to find in the adult world, except maybe at sports games. And yet some parents think "peers" and "friends" are interchangeable terms, as if a child is "friends" with every one of their classmates. I think it's only a subset of a kid's classmates that they really like and get along with, though. Anya has 2 good friends and a few friends we see less often, and I think that's about what it would be if she were in school, too. I never was one to have a large circle of friends, myself, but rather had a few I was very close with.
Another thing is, I am forever discussing social interactions with Anya, trying to puzzle out her feelings and other kids' feelings and why this kid was rude to that kid. At school, social interactions come fast and furious. I remember feeling pretty confused sometimes about why someone was upset, or why this seemingly friendly kid just shoved that other kid, or why I felt like so-and-so didn't like me, etc. And there are many injustices and double standards out on the playground or in the lunchroom, and no time to acknowledge unfairness or meanness, or help a child articulate their emotional reactions. How this confusing atmosphere can possibly foster positive social development is beyond me! NPR once interviewed a homeschooling mom with two pre-teen kids, and she said that at that age their emotions turn on a dime and that she talks to them all day long about what they're feeling.
Sending them out on their own as 5-year-olds, to deal with 25 other 5-year-olds with little adult assistance, is a recipe for Lord of the Flies.
Even setting aside the idea of homeschooling, I'm not convinced that school is even remotely necessary before 6th or 7th grade.
As long as parents are involved with their children(reading to them, playing with them, giving them opportunities to follow their interests) I can't see that there's anything taught in 1st-5th grade that can't be taught later.
Of course, this is really inconvenient for a family if both parents work, whether out of need or out of desire to maintain a high SES.
I completely and thoroughly agree. Wonderful article and so so true. The more time I spend with children through scouting, homeschool groups, and schooled-kids, the more I see exactly what I always felt was true.
Until a child has formed a strong solid sense of self, (which of course varies dratically with each child), there is nothing for them to do but join the crowd.
Post a Comment