Why?

[ChristusG]

Why do we start school so early? And I mean "we" as society in general? We begin schooling around 5 years old. Wouldn't it be better to wait? I know that so many high school students have no idea what they want to be when they grow up. I know that I didn't. I was a teenager, I had friends, I wanted to hang out and have fun. School was not something that I put a lot of effort into. I wasn't failing, but I could have done so much better if I'd only been more mature and had more focus. So many college students still have no idea what they are doing. They switch majors once, twice, three times. I'm not saying this applies to all students, but I know that it does to many.

 

Why couldn't we wait and start formal schooling around 8-10 years old? Let children be children during their young years. They will learn things naturally....and whatever they don't learn, they will be more mature and ready to learn it when they begin formal schooling later on. And it will be easier to learn so you wont need 13 years of school. Maybe formal schooling from 10-20.....maybe by 20 someone will be more mature and focused to begin a career or go to college. More mature to handle a job.

 

There's so many years to be a grown up.....I wish kids could just be kids while they are young instead of forcing them into formal schooling earlier and earlier.

[pqr]

 

 

There's so many years to be a grown up.....I wish kids could just be kids while they are young instead of forcing them into formal schooling earlier and earlier.

 

You are making the false assumption that simply because we start to formally educate our children at an early age that somehow our children are no longer "just kids." This is incorrect.

 

Additionally, I and many others are unwilling to deprive children of several years worth of the opportunity to learn. I was reading at a very young age and learned to love the written word, you would really have had me miss those years of enjoyment so I could remain "just a kid"?

Edited June 30, 2010 by pqr

[Mejane]

I agree with much of what you've said. I do think we push kids too hard too early. I remember reading a study wherein they delayed teaching formal maths until 12 and found kids caught up to their schooled peers in six months. It does seem as though ten years of formal academics should be enough.

 

pqr - you could certainly read for pleasure without attending school. I was an early reader as were my kids.

Edited June 30, 2010 by Mejane

[spradlin02]

I remember slightly regretting not enrolling my son in Montessori preschool at an earlier age. I saw clearly how he was ready for more complex mental exercise and his daycare at the time wasn't fulfilling his need. He's a smart kid, but not any more intelligent than most kids. Personally, I think kids want to be challenge in capacities that suit their developmental stage and we don't serve them well if we tell them to just be a kid.

[Caraway]

Because parents want daycare.

[spradlin02]

I agree with much of what you've said. I do think we push kids too hard too early. I remember reading a study wherein they delayed teaching formal maths until 12 and found kids caught up to their schooled peers in six months. It does seem as though ten years of formal academics should be enough.

 

I feel it's the misguided way the system educates kids. I think kids want to learn, acheive and work hard, but we fail them in the sense that we don't coordinate it to their developmental capabilities, interests and intelligence. I think education is never too early to start, not in an informational capacity, but in fostering creative and independent thinking.

 

My son is six and he's desperately hungry for math, science and engineering education; but not the kind where I get a really big book and beat him over the head until his ears and eyes bleed information.

[patchfire]

I think kids want to learn, acheive and work hard, but we fail them in the sense that we don't coordinate it to their developmental capabilities, interests and intelligence.

 

:iagree:

 

I also think that, in general, children appreciate some sense of structure to their day. Again, the problem comes with the structure is too rigid adn doesn't match where they are.

[Mejane]

I think education is never too early to start, not in an informational capacity, but in fostering creative and independent thinking.

 

 

 

Right. But as you said, that's not what most schools do; in fact, they do the opposite.

[spradlin02]

I guess what I take issue with, and agreeing with the comment by pqr, is the notion that education and childhood are incompatible. Children are constantly learning. So I ask myself what ways can I facilitate my children's natural curiosity and enhance the learning process.

 

Of course, with respect to those things that must be learned but some children simply don't have a natural intelligence for or interest in, then I defer the OP's original query.

[spradlin02]

Right. But as you said, that's not what most schools do; in fact, they do the opposite.

 

Agreed, but I want to stress that it's important to make the distinction between the institutionalized education system and education.

[pqr]

pqr - you could certainly read for pleasure without attending school. I was an early reader as were my kids.

 

...but I learned to read through a "formal" process, i.e. working on letters, sounds, writing etc. This was not osmosis but sitting down and learning.

[WarriorMama]

Why do we start school so early? And I mean "we" as society in general? We begin schooling around 5 years old. Wouldn't it be better to wait? I know that so many high school students have no idea what they want to be when they grow up. I know that I didn't. I was a teenager, I had friends, I wanted to hang out and have fun. School was not something that I put a lot of effort into. I wasn't failing, but I could have done so much better if I'd only been more mature and had more focus. So many college students still have no idea what they are doing. They switch majors once, twice, three times. I'm not saying this applies to all students, but I know that it does to many.

 

Why couldn't we wait and start formal schooling around 8-10 years old? Let children be children during their young years. They will learn things naturally....and whatever they don't learn, they will be more mature and ready to learn it when they begin formal schooling later on. And it will be easier to learn so you wont need 13 years of school. Maybe formal schooling from 10-20.....maybe by 20 someone will be more mature and focused to begin a career or go to college. More mature to handle a job.

 

There's so many years to be a grown up.....I wish kids could just be kids while they are young instead of forcing them into formal schooling earlier and earlier.

 

Here in Ontario, kindergarten starts the September of the year you turn four, and there are two years of it (junior kindergarten and senior kindergarten). So if your birthday falls after September, you start kindergarten at age 3. The government has just started to phase in FULL DAY kindergarten. Within a few years, all public schooled kids will be in full time formal schooling by age 4. I was so appalled! But parents support it because it will cut their daycare costs.

 

On the other hand...this might actually be really beneficial for disadvantaged kids. You know, for kids who are growing up without a single book in their home and other such things, this may really be helpful. I HATE the idea and would never send my children to full day kindergarten - even if I weren't about to start homeschooling ;) - but I have a hard time opposing it fully because I can see the flip side.

 

This is kind of a rambling way of getting around to saying that I think that's why the push for early education - for those kids without the advantages ours might have. Kids who are sitting in front of a television all day, who have parents who never talk to them or discuss things, who have no books and no exposure to ideas, AREN'T going to 'learn things naturally'. Nor will they suddenly be able to once they're older. It might work for kids in a rich and stimulating environment, but the sad fact of life is most kids aren't growing up in that type of world.

 

(I also don't have a problem with formal schooling early on, but I think it's a matter of how much is appropriate - 6 year olds in school 7 hours of the day just seems like such a waste when we're covering the same amount of material and then some in an hour or two, you know?)

 

Anyway. This was really rambling and I'm not sure if it made any sense or really answered your question. I don't get much sleep these days. :tongue_smilie: I think it comes down to the fact that no system is going to work for everyone. Thank goodness we have the option of homeschooling so we can do what works for us!

[Parrothead]

I don't think formal education should wait much past 7ish, but I think what we know as school is not good for the average child. Hence the homeschooling.

 

I agree with the others that institutionalization of education deprives many children in the ways already stated.

[Ginevra]

Wouldn't it be better to wait?

 

No.

 

I actually see the problem of aimless 20-somethings as being a manifestation of the exact opposite. I think we (societal "we") treat kids like immature adult babies too long. Even in the typical high school schedule, most of the required core curricula has been completed by the end of 10th grade. 11th and 12th grade schedules are filled with college-level classes, electives, trades/work skills or work study.

 

I do not ascribe to the false dichotomy that says children can *either* begin learning academic subjects at 5 (or younger) OR they can have a happy, playful, innocent childhood. Besides that, many homeschoolers find that their younger children naturally gravitate towards "doing school" and want to be included in learning academic subjects. They have no mental distinction between learning and play and so much the better.

[Mejane]

...but I learned to read through a "formal" process, i.e. working on letters, sounds, writing etc. This was not osmosis but sitting down and learning.

 

Understood. I went to school knowing how to read, as did my kids. I actually remember just wanting to be left alone to read. I'd have been a very happy homeschooled kid. :001_smile:

[Mejane]

(I also don't have a problem with formal schooling early on, but I think it's a matter of how much is appropriate - 6 year olds in school 7 hours of the day just seems like such a waste when we're covering the same amount of material and then some in an hour or two, you know?)

 

 

 

:iagree:

 

7hours/day X 180days/year X 12years = Little Johnny still can't read.

 

Or is that another topic? ;)

[ChristusG]

See, my daugher is 6 years old. She'd much rather play imaginative things with her sister all day long rather than do formal schooling. I love to see them in there creating things with blocks, "reading" to each other, creating zoos out of blocks and bins, playing "school" and exploring educational books on their own accord, pulling all sorts of things out of our art bin and putting them all together to make a creation. I hate pulling them out of that "zone" and sitting my 6 year old down to do formal schooling. I know that we don't have to accomplish too much at this age, but we still have to do math, reading, handwriting, and various other things. She doesn't loathe these things, but she gets extremely frustrated with it all very easily. I wish I could just put it all off for a while. But that would not conform to this society. There's an end of the year standardized test that she must do well on for our county. She'll need to learn certain things in order to keep up with peers during times like Sunday School and extracurricular activities. So doing less is not really an option here.

 

I do feel like having formal schooling at this age is pulling her away from her childhood sometimes. Kids will learn naturally, at their own pace, without formal schooling in the beginning.

[NanceXToo]

Actually, I tend to agree with you.

 

When my now 9 y/o was just barely 5, she went to public school Kindergarten. She was away from home over 7 hours a day. She spent most of that day doing worksheets and such. Gone are the days of MY kindergarten where we played and learned to share; now Kindergarten is more like 1st or 2nd grade was for us.

 

She only got a 15 minute recess each day, and that was if she didn't lose some or all of it as discipline for talking too much in the classroom.

 

She couldn't talk at lunch because they had "silent lunches." So they could hurry up and grab that 15 minutes of recess. If they hadn't already lost it. So they could hurry back to their desks for more academics. She'd come home on a bus, tired, not getting home til close to 4 PM.

 

1st Grade, at age 6, was more of the same. Plus homework. Plus a "demerit" for talking too much, as opposed to just losing recess.

 

2nd and 3rd grades were better in that she was more capable of sitting quietly when she was supposed to and she wasn't losing recess and she had nice teachers, but now they were really pushing the standardized test preparation and she was getting stomach aches every day, getting stressed out, worrying about some stupid score- and for what?

 

Oh and she was bringing home at LEAST an hour's worth of homework a day. It was REALLY eating into our limited family time, and her limited personal time. These were some of the reasons I ended up finally pulling her out toward the end of third grade and beginning to homeschool instead.

 

I DO believe she was deprived of much opportunity to just be a kid. To explore her world, to be outside, to imagine and create, to be with loved ones, to explore her own interests, to daydream, to pretend, to play, to make decisions, to be a little more independent. They don't allow for any of that in school anymore. It's sad. And by the time they get home from school, there's so little time for any of it, especially amidst the dinner rush and the "getting ready for school tomorrow" routine.

 

Reading the Moore's book "Better Late Than Early" really reinforced what you're saying, too- they really believe that it's much better to delay formal academics until around age 8 or so and they list lots of good reasons why (some even physiological). It also mentioned things like Mejane said, that studies showed that children who didn't learn certain things til a few years later still caught up to their peers, and did it more easily to boot. It was an interesting read, it really makes you think.

 

And I don't agree that delaying formal academics is depriving children of an opportunity to learn... it's just allowing them to learn in different, more natural ways.

 

But then again, homeschool tends to be different than public school anyway. I think... I would HOPE... that most homeschooling moms don't make their 5 year olds sit at desks for 6 hours or so a day like public schools do anyway, and that those five year olds ARE getting much more opportunity to just "be a kid" than they would be were they to be in public school like my daughter was.

 

Anyway, I don't plan to totally put off formal academics with my son (who's almost 4.8) but I DO plan to start him off with Oak Meadow Kindergarten, which is a much more hands-on/creative story and nature based curriculum than many others, and is much slower paced in the very early years (so their K program is really more like a hands on preschool curriculum) and so on. So I think he'll have a much more FUN Kindergarten year than my daughter had! And of course we'll spend MUCH less time "doing school" than she had to, and much more time just, well, "being a kid." :)

[Susan in TX]

I wish I could just put it all off for a while.

 

Then do it! There is no reason why you have to be doing formal academics right now. Unschoolers never do "formal" academics. Even some parents who send their children to public school wait a year to enroll them if they feel their child isn't ready.

 

There are also gentler, child centered ways of teaching those things that our society expects a 6yo to learn. You can teach it all with games. Make it fun if you want to.

 

School doesn't need to take a lot of time: an hour a day of formal "school" is really all that's necessary for a 6yo. For my kids we do 20 minutes of math with Developmental Mathematics and 20-30 minutes working on reading and phonics with Explode the Code Workbooks and easy readers. That's it.

 

Susan in TX

[Mynyel]

You are making the false assumption that simply because we start to formally educate our children at an early age that somehow our children are no longer "just kids." This is incorrect.

 

Additionally, I and many others are unwilling to deprive children of several years worth of the opportunity to learn. I was reading at a very young age and learned to love the written word, you would really have had me miss those years of enjoyment so I could remain "just a kid"?

 

She didn't say that we are to "deprave" children of an education. Why do we "formally" start at 5. Why can't we just introduce them to things and if they want it go with it, if they don't then wait until they are more mature to sit and go through it.

 

Why are we "depraving" our kids of education if we don't start at 5? Wouldn't the exact opposite be true? If we started later wouldn't it be easier for them to retain as the brain comprehends easier? Then more material could be covered in a shorter time?

 

As the OP said who remembers everything, or even a lot of when they were 5, 6 or even 7? I certainly don't. I don't remember learning to read, write or do math. Not until I would say 9-10 do I really start remembering what was done in the classroom.

 

I too think we start pounding too early. We grade them and hold them back if they don't "pass". That is degrading to a child. That is the reason I took my child out of school They said she was failing in math. She is now 2 grades ahead.

 

They push kids way to hard. Between the ages of 5 and 8-9 they are ramming all sorts of things down kids throats. Here where I live they "prepare" months in advance for third grade testing :001_huh: If they are getting a decent education why all the "preparing".

 

Even we homeschoolers can push out kids to far. Trying to "keep up with the education Jones'". Our kids need to be reading at a 2nd grade level at 5, they need to be ahead by at least 1 grade level in each subject. While we don't all do that, it does nag in the back of our heads! (admit it! :D)

 

I think we do push to hard to early but I think if education is done gently at the child pace education starts at birth! :)

[pqr]

She didn't say that we are to "deprave" children of an education.

Why are we "depraving" our kids of education if we don't start at 5?

 

???

 

Please tell me you mean deprive. (That word (deprave) has led to great consternation on other threads)

 

Even we homeschoolers can push out kids to far. Trying to "keep up with the education Jones'". Our kids need to be reading at a 2nd grade level at 5, they need to be ahead by at least 1 grade level in each subject. While we don't all do that, it does nag in the back of our heads! (admit it! :D)

 

Absolutely. One reason I pulled my kids out of PS because I wanted them to get an education. As many PSs seem unable to do this. I certainly want my kids to be ahead of their PS year group. By the way, one year is unacceptable I want several years ahead by High School.

Edited July 1, 2010 by pqr

[Ginevra]

I hate pulling them out of that "zone" and sitting my 6 year old down to do formal schooling.

 

To me, your beef is with the governmental interference and homeschool oversite, not with society in general. I live in a state that has moderate laws; there are some hoops I have to jump through to be found compliant. However, there is more than one way to jump through the hoops. I have friends who wouldn't dream of pulling their 6yo out of the zone to sit down with Saxon Math.

[Ginevra]

???

 

Please tell me you mean deprive. (That word has led to great consternation on other threads)

:lol: Google dictionary. Handy.

[ChristusG]

She didn't say that we are to "deprave" children of an education. Why do we "formally" start at 5. Why can't we just introduce them to things and if they want it go with it, if they don't then wait until they are more mature to sit and go through it.

 

Why are we "depraving" our kids of education if we don't start at 5? Wouldn't the exact opposite be true? If we started later wouldn't it be easier for them to retain as the brain comprehends easier? Then more material could be covered in a shorter time?

 

 

 

Exactly. I didn't mean not to educate them at all....I just meant formally. Learning can come in all forms.

[*Amber*]

I fall into the category of letting them learn at their own desire. ie....... My DD who is almost 4 is begging to learn to read so I will start OPGTTR next month. I plan on doing it at her pace though so if she doesn't want to do it that day or begins to get frustrated then we can skip that day or do one lesson for X number of days in a row.

 

On the same token, if she wasn't ready for academics until the age of 6 then that would be okay too. If at 6 she was still pretty wiggly and having trouble sitting through lessons then we would do a gentle approach and slowly introduce her to having a school time.

 

I really think we need to get over what everyone says and just do what our child is ready for. It isn't about early or late it is about readiness.

[Barry Goldwater]

http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/chapters/

 

and it isn't pretty.

[spradlin02]

See, my daugher is 6 years old. She'd much rather play imaginative things with her sister all day long rather than do formal schooling. I love to see them in there creating things with blocks, "reading" to each other, creating zoos out of blocks and bins, playing "school" and exploring educational books on their own accord, pulling all sorts of things out of our art bin and putting them all together to make a creation...

One name...Howard Gardner

One paradigm...Multiple Intelligences

One institute...Project Zero

And one ring to rule them all.

[Rosie_0801]

24 kids can't unschool inside one classroom, can they? There's not enough room.

 

Rosie