In parts of Europe, parents hold off on formally educating children until they are “ready to learn”. In Finland, students start school “late,” receiving no formal instruction until age seven. Finnish daycare centers often replace reading, writing and math instruction with opportunities for creative play. Kindergarten in Finland is not geared to prepare students for primary instruction. Instead, the focus of “education” revolves heavily around specifically structured play and physical activity. The goal is to ensure children are happy and age-appropriately responsible.
When I started my career in teaching, I would have scoffed at such an idea. As an experienced educator, I embrace the idea, I can see the potential benefit of it, and I think this concept should be considered in American schools. One’s first thought might be that waiting until a student is seven before entering school would render the student woefully behind academically and perhaps even socially. But that isn’t necessarily so.
In Finland, it appears that children’s social and physical development is being established BEFORE students enter primary school. Ideally, with children entering school with more maturity, perhaps less time could be spent on teaching social skills and classroom management, and more quality time could be spent on effective instruction.
If we think about it, many seniors who graduate high school lack the maturity or readiness necessary to succeed in college. Some take a gap year before enrolling into university. If this is true of students at eighteen, how much more might this apply to our youngest students? Many children are not developmentally ready to leave parental care to enter Head Start, pre-K or kindergarten.
Wouldn’t it serve our children better to remove the “start kindergarten at five” tradition in favor of contemporary policies that consider the needs of each child individually? For children who demonstrate readiness to enter school “early,” perhaps they can be allowed to. For children who aren’t developmentally or socially ready for school, the freedom to enter formal education “late” could be an option that results in positive academic outcomes, reduced classroom misbehavior, and more school enjoyment. As we imagine returning
As we imagine returning to school buildings, this is a good time to reimagine education overall. For decades, we have done things the same way. Kids start school at five and leave school at eighteen. What would happen if there was no narrow set start or exit time? Would it be disastrous if students exited school at twenty? Would there be a major meltdown if children started school at seven, as opposed to five? Must we have twelve years to complete school? Just like college students who take five or six years to complete a four-year program, maybe primary and secondary students could benefit from a few extra years if they need more time to achieve.
I don’t suppose this idea would be popular with education policymakers, but since I know kids are academically, emotionally and developmentally diverse, it makes sense that how and when students enter, flow through and exit school should be diverse as well. Something to consider as we imagine returning to the classroom.
Email comments to FM-TeachersLounge@gmail.com
Follow me on Twitter @ DrTeresaSanders
Check out my blog at www.TeresaESanders.com
- Log in or Subscribe to post comments.