Teachers opinion on primary start age?

r93kaey5p2izun

My experience at second level was the older the better. The worst time for social life distractions and immature "I can do what I like I'm an adult" behaviour was when they were 17 I found. Getting in to pubs and clubs underage and attending 18th birthday parties consumes their lives. They settle down and it loses the novelty once they're 18. I think it's best if they get that over with in 5th Year or very early 6th Year.

Treppen

jelly&icecream wrote: »

I'm reading this with great interest! I'm in the same position with a March girl. Husband wants to definitely send her this Sept, I'm more hesitant, for no particular reason other than just airing on the side of caution.

We moved her from preschool to Montessori in the creche a few months ago and she's just come on so far after that jump. It seemed like she was copying the babyish behaviour of the other preschoolers to get more attention.

She's articulate, able to draw recognisable human figures with a pencil, toilet trained very easily at 2.5 etc. But at the same time is scared to sit on Santa's lap

It's sooo tough! Hubbie reckons we'd be holding her back.

Is that idea if transition year bring scraped serious? Hasn't heard of it. Any one know the source?

The ty Program might be changed but they can't just cut a year of schooling. Apart from students... You'll have hundreds of schools possibly over quota and they'd have to redeploy teachers appropriately, that would be a logistical nightmare.

Or school took about 20 years to build up a fairly good program which the students really benefit from.

Inspectors blow their lid if they suspect 4th year students are covering the LC course too. I suspect if they change it they'll homogenise & sterilise it with BS learning outcomes, intentions, criteria, tonnes of paperwork and CBAs coming out of students ears. Maybe they're planning that for the Leaving cert as we speak.

joebloggs32

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

Primary teacher here .Down the years , in various different school settings, I’ve seen very young infants getting a poor start to formal schooling , which can have big social and emotional implications that will impact on their learning, self esteem and progress . The notion of “ keeping a child back” is very much frowned upon by the DES -and in any case , it’s been proved world wide as damaging to the child .
My thoughts are that she may be fine / she may not , so why take the chance .

Leaving aside that each child is different , I would say to wait . It’s been tossed around that Transition Year will be abolished , so that could make her very young trying to do her Leaving / Going To college .

The only way transition year will be abolished is if a 3 year senior cycle is introduced.

I sent my child who is March to school at 4.5 years. She is absolutely flying now and will be moving on to secondary level in a few years. I'd feel if she did Ty then she would have been too old finishing up iw we had started her at 5.5

solerina

Send her at 4.5, I cannot see TY being abolished, she will benefit more from that year than from an extra year not in school now. Students who do TY and are that year older from starting later seem to really withdraw and resent being still in school....that’s what I see anyway....and on a regular basis but obviously not with all students.

peckerhead

Everyone here, understandably, is going to base their reply on their own experience or on individual examples they've seen. I was a secondary teacher before moving to third level, and currently lecturing (mostly) to either B.Ed students training as primary teachers or BAs heading for secondary via the PME. Oh, and father of five (now adults). One of them a primary school teacher teaching Infant classes.

As you said yourself, OP, there are certainly pros and cons either way, and no two 4-year-olds (or 5-year-olds) are the same. First-borns in particular are typically more 'advanced' in a range of ways, and I'm sure that academically your little one would be more than capable; as a girl, she probably has highly developed verbal skills for her age (and would cope absolutely fine with reading and writing activities), but there are a host of other emotional/affective/social factors to consider and on balance I would certainly recommend waiting another year.

Treppen

I think the .5 is important. Starting at 5.5 would mean they'd be 6 for half the year in JI.
Starting at 4.5 would mean 5.
So it's not quite the same as saying ' starting at 4 or 5 '
It's been mentioned s few times about the profile of the whole group ( and of course that can all flip if they go seperate ways into different secondary schools).
It might be worth the Op's time to go to the horses mouth and find out. Talk to the principal.
They might have a good few applications to be able to identify where she's at in the age scale.

Maybe check where they go after primary. Some rural areas might have the same bunch in 6th year as in JI. Probably a longshot but still worth checking out.

TheValeyard

Also a teacher. Similar to the OP. My firstborn is 5 in late September. I feel six would be too late and just turning 4 too early. From conversations with other colleagues and parents, 5 does seem to be the best of both worlds option.

hometruths

Treppen wrote: »

I think the .5 is important. Starting at 5.5 would mean they'd be 6 for half the year in JI.
Starting at 4.5 would mean 5.
So it's not quite the same as saying ' starting at 4 or 5 '
It's been mentioned s few times about the profile of the whole group ( and of course that can all flip if they go seperate ways into different secondary schools).
It might be worth the Op's time to go to the horses mouth and find out. Talk to the principal.
They might have a good few applications to be able to identify where she's at in the age scale.

Maybe check where they go after primary. Some rural areas might have the same bunch in 6th year as in JI. Probably a longshot but still worth checking out.

You've hit the nail on the head with the .5

We've asked the school and they say best guess at average age at this stage is 4.5 - 5.

jelly&icecream

Treppen wrote: »

The ty Program might be changed but they can't just cut a year of schooling. Apart from students... You'll have hundreds of schools possibly over quota and they'd have to redeploy teachers appropriately, that would be a logistical nightmare.

Or school took about 20 years to build up a fairly good program which the students really benefit from.

Inspectors blow their lid if they suspect 4th year students are covering the LC course too. I suspect if they change it they'll homogenise & sterilise it with BS learning outcomes, intentions, criteria, tonnes of paperwork and CBAs coming out of students ears. Maybe they're planning that for the Leaving cert as we speak.

I would imagine scraping it would be a logistical nightmare alright. It is coming into play in our decision making. All the local secondaries seem to have it as pretty much compulsory unlike where I grew up.

19 does seem on the old side for doing the leaving, I'd have been going up the walls trapped in school that long.