To School or Not to School, That is The Question

Tuesday, 03 February 2009 21:03

I'm not normally a fan of Miranda Devine's opinion pieces, but last weekend (Jan 31-1 Feb, SMH News Review, p.7) she wrote an article that could change my mind about her writing altogether. She was quoting research that demonstrate the lack of substance to the majority opinion within the Early Childhood field that children should be held back from school for as long as possible - especially boys.

For the uninitiated, preschool teachers have been advocating holding children back for years. Because of the myth that this is beneficial, further fanned by Steve Biddulph's Raising Boys, I have had the hardest time trying to convince parents, especially parents of gifted boys, to send their children to school early. While I taught at preschool, I used to agonise over parents who politely declined my advice about sending their boys to school. I had to watch eager, bright-eyed and curious big boys with healthy self esteem shrink into dull eyed little boys, whose friends had left for school. By July of the following year most of their parents felt sorely uncomfortable, when their child's boredom turned to challenging mischief because of pent up frustration at being kept small. But even then, most parents stubbornly held on to their strategic decision that their child would benefit and was bound to do better than others. Miranda put it brilliantly: "Knowing you're the king pin but that you're only that because you're older can't be all that good for self-esteem". How right she is, and imagine the even worse scenario of being overtaken by someone in your class who is 18 months younger - a distinct possibility! At least, this is what the research has found, because apparently the advantage of being older eventually disappears. As I wrote in my early entry article (available on this website), age has little to do with whether a child is ready for school. My experience tells me that readiness is about a child being keen, and the research shows that it is also about social and emotional maturity. So if you are thinking of 'holding your child back' until s/he is 5 or 6, especially if s/he is gifted, it may be worth your while to give away Steve Biddulph's book, suspend the early childhood myth that "children should be allowed to be children" (what exactly is that, anyway, in today's 360 degree super-information 24/7?), and read the research. Hopefully you will be convinced of the evidence. As an added benefit, you will gain a very proud and happy child who is allowed to continue to be who he or she is - growing, developing, learning. Incidentally, earlier research has also shown that children who appeared to be immature, became more mature by simply attending school. An added problem for parents of gifted children is their child's relative emotional immaturity in comparison with their intellectual ability, so a good idea is simply to visit school with your child and ask "do you want to go to school next year?". In the end it is about trusting the child and the process and allowing the child's readiness to decide when it's time to move on.

Here is a reference to the research article that inspired Miranda Divine to write hers:

Elder, T. E. & Lubotsky, D. H. (2009). Kindergarten entrance age and children's achievement: Impacts of State policies, family background, and peers.(The paper is forthcoming in the Journal of Human Resources. It will be published sometime in 2009).

 TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (3)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Show/hide comments

Jill Taylor: ...

How great to read this - I was advised to hold back my son, because his birthday was in March (relatively late), because "boys do better to wait a year", and because at preschool he declined to join in the main playgroup if it got too boisterous and happily would occupy himself with something else. This apparently was a sign of social immaturity. But my son was OUTRAGED at the idea of waiting a year, and was very absolute in his desire to start school. He absolutely thrived in his first year at school, especially as there was not hours of undirected play, as at preschool, but organised learning. His kindergarten teacher wrote on his end of year report that he "shows great composure and confidence for a child of his age". Other words mentioned were "resourceful, self-reliant, sensitive to the needs of others, well-mannered...." etc! So glad I listened to my child and not the so-called educational experts. I really think the 4 turning 5 year-old is like a sponge for knowledge, and what a waste to not fill them up with learning when they are so ready for it. (And this includes learning about social skills). I've noticed a slowing in my son's learning pace now he is starting year 3, and am glad that those important formative years at school happened when he was on such a accelerated learning curve. So hooray that people are starting to question this myth about holding back the boys!!

1

• report abuse
• vote down
• vote up

18:07 03 Feb 09
Votes: +0

Ally: ...

Timely advice - my son will be 3 in March; people have been asking whether he would attend the 6 hours a week of 3-year-old preschool (affiliated with his sister's primary school) this year. Through the primary school he has made a few playmates close to his age who will start 3yo preschool next year, so after consideration, I decided it might be best for him to stay with his 'friends'. It's very hard to know whether, like his sister, he will be ready to start kindy the year he turns 5. I admit I have been influenced by the popular idea that boys find it harder to settle into the school environment, and also by the wonderful anecdotes I've heard about Scandinavian countries where children don't start formal schooling until age 7. I do worry though that I might be holding him back for the wrong reasons; we had a lovely time in the garden this morning, picking and crunching on sugar-snap peas...am I just being sentimental!? He has hung on the fence of the pre-school and asked when he can go to 'school' - he wants a turn on the scooters. Would it be harmful to give pre-school a try and then give up til next year if it doesn't work out? What are the intended benefits of pre-school?

2

• report abuse
• vote down
• vote up

23:19 04 Feb 09
Votes: +0

ungifted: ...

There have been raging debates on this issue. There are pros and cons depending on the particular kids. But the general sound advice is to assess every kid as an individual and the interest of the kids. Some parents of poor families are very keen to send kids to school early to save on fees and free the mother up to work to make some money. Some parents from richer families want to kids to start late to perform well and play "leadership" over the other kids for the ego of the parents. If the decision is based on "What is good for the parents?", it's wrong. If it's based on the real interest of the kids then it's mostly right.

The extra performance based purely on older age will fade by year 3-4. But this can well be what many overly competitive parents want. If they can have their kids taking out top awards every year from K-3, they are just too happy to hold them back by one year. For gifted kids, this can backfire. However it can also ensure the kids will always come top of the class for 4 years in a row from K-3 before being really tested by other younger kids. And the feeling of being passed by a younger kids isn't nice but that is a chance lower than 50% anyway.

It depends on the area (too many bullies?) and the ethos of the school too. There are too many things to base your decision on. But people cannot be wrong if they could objectively focus on the interest of the kids. Generally if the kids have no health problems, no mental problems and is willing to go to school, they should go.

I have a child who started school on the right age, outclassed by older kids and passed them later. I know too well that being older is only a temporary advantage.

3

• report abuse
• vote down
• vote up

19:56 04 Mar 09
Votes: +0

 Show/hide comment form