http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/8309153.stm

I dunno about this as I can only go by my nephew really - he's three, can read and say the whole alphabet and numbers no problem, spell (and kinda) write his name etc, so in that sense, I'm not sure this proposal is such a good idea... Kinda depends on the average level of understanding at that age I guess

My cousins daughter Molli Mai is 5 now.

At the age of 3, she knew numbers 0-50, she knew the alphabet, she knew how to write, and spell her entire name. She also knew what alot of domestic animals were, she knew all the nursery rhymes (although, going by what the news said, it's only the Welsh that sing nursery rhymes to their children. *shrug*), she also knew all the names of everyone in her family, including cousins, aunties and uncles.
She knew alot more at that age, but I think you get the drift.

As some of you might know, my Sam is a primary school teacher, and he just loves having her over because he gets to test things with her. She loves it to, she loves all the stickers and shiny things that he gives her when she does things right.

Molli can read now, at only 5. She can read a proper kids book alone. If she can't read a word she asks for help and we have her to spell it out by using sounds.

She's very intelligent for her age, so I think for lessons to start at 6 is just stupid. It's holding alot of kids back.

I didn't learn anything in the first year of primary school. I mostly played with Sticklebricks and painted stuff.

At home, I'd already learned to read and 'rite and some fairly advanced 'rithmatic. School was more of a "play-group" than anything else.

However, most parents look forward to getting rid of the kids for part of the day. I doubt many would be happy to be stuck with them for an extra year.

Stupid idea. I started school about two weeks after my forth birthday. That was a good thing. What a waste of two years it would have been if I'd started at six.

The headline made me think they were talking about getting the kids up really early in the morning - would have fixed the 8am school run farce at least.

Seriously, I don't think an extra 2 years with the kid at home would be affordable for most families, especially with the cost of childcare to consider and especially with the new scheme they are proposing for getting everyone vetted before they are allowed near a child.

There is no suggestion that kids will be kept at home until starting school at six. The idea is that they start at 4 or 5 like they do now, and spend a couple of years playing, learning to socialise with other kids, learning language and social skills. Then they start "proper" school when they get to 6.

If a child is shown to be bright and wants to learn to read or do sums, then there's room for that to be encouraged. There's no talk of anyone being held back if they show aptitude for learning. After all, we all learn at different rates. I didn't properly get to read until I was well into my second year at primary, but once I got it I was away and left most of my peers in the dust.

Was I alone in thinking 'That sounds a bit early in the morning for most people.'?

That was also the first thing I thought, and we are not alone:

I am so glad it wasn't only me who misunderstood the title.

+1

We need to do this before Britain disappears up its own stressed-out, performance-related ass.

-1
Children need less tests, not less education.

Fewer tests. "Less tests" would kinda mean crappier tests.

Lesser tests, surely?

Less tests would mean crap tests...

Hence my use of the vagueness qualifier "kinda".

Anyone seen Heather?

I made a comment about a conversation that a couple of people were having at work today. I think they were talking about car parking spaces or something.

The conversation went something along the lines of...

A: "I think there should be less child parking spaces so people don't keep taking them".

B: "No, I think there should be less disabled spots as all the 4x4 drivers park across them."

Me: "I think more people should use 'fewer' where it is necessary".



I think I contributed nicely to the conversation.