Beginning School at just four?

theLuggage

Quick question for parents of school-going children at all stages.

Looking at our school's admission policy we seem to have the option of sending our girl to school in the year when she'll have just turned 4 (assuming they have the space). She will only turn 5 at the very start of Senior Infants so counting it along she'll start secondary just turned 12, doing her Junior Cert at 14 and her Leaving Cert (doing TY) at 17! She'll only turn 18 in her first her in college/work or whatever she's at after school. :eek:

Do you think it's very young to start? Has anyone started their child that young and how did it turn out? Any advice or thoughts?

Thanks

Midnight Sundance

Speaking from a teacher's point of view, there's a big difference between most 4 and 5 year olds. I do recognise that some 4 year olds are ready for school and some 5 year olds are still not ready, but I find that 5 year old jun inf are usually more socially developed and have better fine motor skills etc.
I also feel that children are only small for such a short period of time and once they start school we are always encouraging them to grow up .
Personally I'd hold her off until she is five ( from speaking to other teachers who are parents , most of them wait until the child is five)

Call Me Jimmy

I started at 4 years of age and it was grand, got my degree there in the summer!

liliq

I'd tend to wait til 5, but my friend started her girl last year at 4 and she's doing great. She's always been very social and very good with communicating though which I think makes the a difference.
My son I couldn't imagine being ready at 4.
I think the extra years makes it a bit easier for them to be cooped up for the few hours, whereas when they're younger they can't control their energy as easily.

Chattastrophe!

Myself and three of my siblings started when we were just turned four (September birthdays.)

I never had any problems. I was always youngest in my class, but it never bothered me, and didn't hold me back academically. Myself and my sister both did Transition Year, so we were just turning 18 starting college. My brother didn't, so he was seventeen for all of first year - a pain in the ass not being able to go out with his friends, but he did get great results that year! :pac:

My other brother was just not mature enough, and was always a little behind the rest of his class, so he ended up repeating first class. No big deal - he was happy to do it, and even with that he still wasn't the oldest in his class.

It really depends on the child in question. It's not fair on the teacher to have a child in the class who's just not ready to be there. Having said that, if a child is ready, I see no point in holding them back any longer than you have to.

theLuggage

Thanks for all the feedback. I would also have thought if they're ready to go for it but heard a comment from a parent today regretting starting their child early. Their child is a teenager now and they feel is too young for where she is in school, with friends etc. Panicked a bit at that because even if you think they're grand to go at 4 you're not guaranteed it will keep working out that way. But I guess that's the case with everything, you never know how it'll turn out for any of them :-)

Kettleson

A lot of it is down to the child. Works for some, others not so good. But what's the worst that can happen? Personally I'd wait to 5 as I think that the longer spent at home with mum or dad or both, so much the better. But some kids are ready at 4 others not. And if in a crèche, whats the difference?

Don't listen to the regretters too much. Listen to your own mind and reasoning and your own understanding of your child.

Chocolate fiend

I would wait, they are in education long enough. Imagine her heading off to a different city at just turned 18 to go to College. Does the school really not have a cut off date for ages on it's admission policy?

How Strange

If she's just turning four then I'd wait. It's not just when she starts school that you have to consider but also when she's in secondary school and up to a year younger than her peers.

I was 4.5 starting and I was always the youngest for everything.

ash23

I would say wait. My daughter was 4 yrs 7 months so she was fine.
I started school late in the school year on my fourth birthday. So I was 11 going into secondary (for a few weeks) and I did my LC at 16. I started university a few weeks before I turned 17.

At the time I was pig headed and adamant that I was able for it even though my parents wanted me to wait a year before going to uni. Academically I was well able. I was bright, one of the top in the class all through school and found the coursework no problem. Flew through my exams and got above and beyond the points I needed for uni.
But moving out of home, getting a job, paying bills, socialising and drinking.....I was only just gone 17 and in the adult world.
I dropped out of college after 2nd year and got pregnant at 19 - I just wasn't able to handle everything at that age.

Now it worked out for me, I had my child, copped on and have a good job, finished my qualifications (aged 30 lol) and I don't regret a thing about how my life turned out. But I just think long term, even if the child is academically able for an early start in school, socially it can cause issues. For me those problems didn't start until I was finished school and there had been no reason to think that there would have been an issue throughout all my school years but I just wasn't ready for college at 16/17.

January

I'd wait also. My eldest started at 4yrs 9 months and is doing great and my middle child will be starting at 4yrs 6 months. My youngest has an October birthday and because of school cut off she misses going to school the year she turns four. To be honest I'm delighted, I think she'd be too young at just gone 4. She'll do her pre-school year that year instead and head into Junior Infants at 4yrs 11 months.

Ah_Yeah

I started school on my fourth birthday in September - I was a smart child and very independent, and my parents felt that I was more than ready to start school. The benefit from the child's point of view (in my personal experience) is that time is even more on your side. I had my degree at the age of 21 and have been working full time for 3 years already, enabling me to have a relatively successful career at the age of just 24.

It really depends on your child - if you feel she is ready, then there is no reason why she shouldn't start

Foodle

Children born from June 1 on should have to wait the extra year.

Gonzp

I think that you have to look at the bigger picture here... Its not about the immediate, its about the future... Could you imagine your child just turning twelve and heading into secondary school, I think that's far too young and its also difficult to cope socially let alone academically.. Alot of people look at school as childcare and that should n't be the case. Children go to school to be educated not to be looked after. I think you should keep her till she's five, then you can send her to school with the knowledge that you are giving her the best chance to progress properly both academically and socially, she will mature at the proper rate and never be in the position that she will be playing catch up with the rest of her peers. I have friends that sent children to school the minute they turned four because it saved them childcare costs, and now they are in the position that their children are completing their leaving cert at 16... not good... Short term pain for long term gain I reckon...

coffee_cake

Ah_Yeah wrote: »

I started school on my fourth birthday in September - I was a smart child and very independent, and my parents felt that I was more than ready to start school. The benefit from the child's point of view (in my personal experience) is that time is even more on your side. I had my degree at the age of 21 and have been working full time for 3 years already, enabling me to have a relatively successful career at the age of just 24.

It really depends on your child - if you feel she is ready, then there is no reason why she shouldn't start

Couldn't agree more
If she's ready now, then get her going now. She can always do transition year, take a year out before uni, etc. No point holding her back if she's well able for it because of might bes

Gambas

Foodle wrote: »

Children born from June 1 on should have to wait the extra year.

That's probably a decent cut off date IMO, but there has to be room for exceptions.

As for the OP, I'd send her daughter if she feels she is ready, and if she finds it a little bit beyond her then she can easily repeat either junior or senior infants which is quite common. Better that than effectively 'repeating' a year in preschool, which would be fairly worthless and probably frustrating to her.

How Strange

Is it still the done hing to repeat a year? I thought most schools discouraged it as a general rule and it'd really only done now when a child is genuinely struggling. I know when I was in school it was quite normal to start them young and do junior or senior infants twice.

Gambas

Gambas wrote: »

That's probably a decent cut off date IMO, but there has to be room for exceptions.

As for the OP, I'd send her daughter if she feels she is ready, and if she finds it a little bit beyond her then she can easily repeat either junior or senior infants which is quite common. Better that than effectively 'repeating' a year in preschool, which would be fairly worthless and probably frustrating to her.

In response to this and the early comment around "what is the worst that can happen?" - I would be careful about assuming that repeating a year is no big deal to a young child.

Of course there will be people who did repeat and didn't care. But there are also those who effectively feel they are labelled as a failure, 'not clever enough' to move on to the next class, behind everyone else etc. That sort of experience can stick with a child.

Personally, I would wait. Isn't it better for your child to be the one who is experiencing success, has a positive attitude to school, someone the other kids look up to because they are ahead of them, etc etc?

There's also no real evidence that starting early helps in any significant way. Isn't it Finland where they don't teach children to read until they are seven?! And it doesn't do them any harm.

coffee_cake

Deleted User wrote: »

There's also no real evidence that starting early helps in any significant way. Isn't it Finland where they don't teach children to read until they are seven?! And it doesn't do them any harm.

Formal education yes. Keeping books away from them until then and teaching them it's a chore to be avoided, no

Ah_Yeah

Children are like sponges - the earlier they start learning the better. Not saying this means the child should start school at 4 but I see no reason why learning should be held back if the child is ready.

Ah_Yeah

Ah_Yeah wrote: »

Children are like sponges - the earlier they start learning the better. Not saying this means the child should start school at 4 but I see no reason why learning should be held back if the child is ready.

Yes but the key phrase is 'if the child is ready' isn't it?

Don't agree with the sponge analogy either. Sponges can't decide they don't like absorbing water and actively seek ways to avoid it. Children can learn to hate school, reading and learning if their experiences are not positive.

Ah_Yeah

Deleted User wrote: »

Yes but the key phrase is 'if the child is ready' isn't it?

Don't agree with the sponge analogy either. Sponges can't decide they don't like absorbing water and actively seek ways to avoid it. Children can learn to hate school, reading and learning if their experiences are not positive.

Yes - that's exactly what most people on this thread have been saying?

Children can learn to hate school when they are 10, 14, or 16 too. That isn't unique to starting early.

Ah_Yeah

Ah_Yeah wrote: »

Yes - that's exactly what most people on this thread have been saying?

Children can learn to hate school when they are 10, 14, or 16 too. That isn't unique to starting early.

My point is that it's a subjective judgement, and there is no more subjective judgement in the world than a parent's judgement about their child.

I am sure most primary teachers would recommend waiting, and my advice was simply to caution against the 'what's the worst thing that can happen' argument. The worst thing that can happen is the child doesn't like going to school and feels like a failure.

coffee_cake

Deleted User wrote: »

Yes but the key phrase is 'if the child is ready' isn't it?

Don't agree with the sponge analogy either. Sponges can't decide they don't like absorbing water and actively seek ways to avoid it. Children can learn to hate school, reading and learning if their experiences are not positive.

She was talking about learning and school separately

paddymc1

Out of our 4 girls our 1st went when she was 4.2 but was well able for it and we also took advise through playscholl on her development test they do to make sure they are ready and they said yes for sure. She would have got bored if left for another year and this also could cause problems to in long term, really depends on the child. Our next 2 girls where just going 4.6 & 4.9 before starting and that was ok for them as they both would not have been ready like our 1st child. Our 4th who is only 2 now will be 4.9 and judging at her now she be well ready like her big sister. It really depends on the child and each one is different, our second one could of been held off another year but has come on leaps and bounds in last year. Girls usually more ready than the boys. As others have posted got to look at long term to, as in secondry will they be able, do they need do TR year, ours will it means they will not be as young when (fingers crossed) they go to college and they should be able to cope with all that is ahead of them. Think the teacher who posted here has good advise..

Gambas

Deleted User wrote: »

In response to this and the early comment around "what is the worst that can happen?" - I would be careful about assuming that repeating a year is no big deal to a young child.

Of course there will be people who did repeat and didn't care. But there are also those who effectively feel they are labelled as a failure, 'not clever enough' to move on to the next class, behind everyone else etc. That sort of experience can stick with a child.

In junior and senior infants those concepts don't apply.

Personally, I would wait. Isn't it better for your child to be the one who is experiencing success, has a positive attitude to school, someone the other kids look up to because they are ahead of them, etc etc?

This is where this theory falls down. Everyone can't be the eldest in their class. If everyone holds their child back as long as possible you end up back to square one. The weaker kids end up behind the more capable ones once again because they too have been held back. You can only give your child that advantage at the expense of another child; it is a zero sum game.

There's also no real evidence that starting early helps in any significant way. Isn't it Finland where they don't teach children to read until they are seven?! And it doesn't do them any harm.

'Starting' implies that there is no education prior to junior infants, or prior to 7 years old in Finland. In neither case is it true. In Ireland, from what I can see anyway, the quality of education in 'school' is much better than the quality in preschool. I'm sure there are plenty of examples to the contrary, but that it a reasonable generalisation.

bluewolf

bluewolf wrote: »

She was talking about learning and school separately

You can't stop a child learning.

I wonder what you mean by learning, and what you mean by starting learning early?

Gambas

Gambas wrote: »

In junior and senior infants those concepts don't apply.

??

You either move on to the next class with your friends or you don't. Children are not stupid, they know what is going on in that situation.

Foodle

[Deleted User] wrote: »

??

You either move on to the next class with your friends or you don't. Children are not stupid, they know what is going on in that situation.

Of course it applies !!!

Ah_Yeah

Deleted User wrote: »

You can't stop a child learning.

I wonder what you mean by learning, and what you mean by starting learning early?

I thought it would have been self explanatory - by teaching your child you are helping them to learn early. The later you leave it to teach a child to read (in an example provided earlier), the longer the child has not learned to read .

Anyway, I won't debate further on this with you as it is pointless.

OP, my opinion is that if the child is ready and capable of starting this year - go for it. Anyone that is capable and ready that has started early has only seen benefits from it. If you child is not capable and ready, then don't do it as they won't benefit from the extra year.

Gambas

Deleted User wrote: »

??

You either move on to the next class with your friends or you don't. Children are not stupid, they know what is going on in that situation.

They don't see themselves as 'failures' at 5 years of age. Unless someone decides to make them feel that way. In most schools they end up being split from their friends anyway because the classes are mixed from one year to the next and their friends change from one year to the next.