Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I am interested to hear your views on children's development through the primary school. Do you find that he ones who are top stay top throughout - as was the case in my school more or less- or is the much mentioned "late developer" a reality?


I don't have any reason for asking save that my husband and I disagree on it(!) so your views will be fascinating and very welcome either way.

Thanks. That makes perfect sense as clearly a 4.9 year old child could be quite different from one who has just turned four and could well catch up over time.


My husband insists there were pupils at his school who suddenly managed a mega developmental phase aged about 15 and did fabulously in eg A levels when their previous exam results - O levels in our day! - had been fairly hopeless. I wonderif he just remembers it this way.


Otoh, there were girls at school who had been very bright who dropped out of the picture and reverse developed if you like. It was put down to previous parental involvement tailing off and the playing field getting a bit flatter.

There are bound to be 'late developers' when we start children in school at the ridiculously early age of 4.

I wonder if they are then condemned to stay as 'late developers' because they made to feel by teachers/parents that they are behind in some way and so need more special help and teaching, which then probably aggravates the problem and makes them feel like failures...when really they are just teaching academics to some children too soon. To have successes in the system you have to have the failures, or the whole fascade crumbles and the success means nothing. Schools know this and factor it in.

not a teacher - well not the 'proper' sort anyway, but this is quite interesting as i have a case study going on in my house at the moment. Biggest boy in our house is an August baby & hated school & nursery from the outset. In infants & juniors he was pretty much bottom set for everything except maths (top middle). He didn't read at all until he was about 8 or 9, then struggled with reading & writing until he was about 12, being diagnosed with dyslexia & dyspraxia. Now he's 14, & seems to be doing - well, OK actually. Academically he's in the top or top middle groups at school, and I can forsee that once he can specialise a bit (A levels) he'll probably do very well ac academically - all other things being equal. I still fret over the fact that he'll be taking all his GCSE's etc at 15 & A levels at 17, but there's little I can do about it.


I think that there are boys like this in most schools - boys that do so much better once they can study only the subjects that interest them. I think you're husband could be right New Mother (but I won't tell him if you won't) ;-).

We all do better in the subjects that we are interested in. That's how learning really works. I mean, what can we all really remember from school? I have certainly learnt more since I left! Ironically I think some children (probably the ones who are supported by loving families) who don't do so well at school tend to do better in life. They have found other skills to compensate for academic ability...which let's face it is mostly remembering random facts and figures and how good you are at spewing it over a page in exam conditions. Having a 2 boys myself I can really see that my son (who stared reception this September) is not ready or interested in reading/writing. That is all the school are interested in though...not the amazing things he can build out of Lego, or how he can run, jump, headstand and balance on a bike.


SW - can you son take GCSE's a year or 2 later instead? Someone even told me yesterday that you don't need GCSE's to do A-levels, which I thought was interesting.

Hmm, it's something we haven't explored really cuppa tea, but I guess the answer would be 'yes', but not within the standard school system so it would involve him leaving his established friendship group to go to a further Ed college. At the moment I think that kind of upheaval isn't something he'd want to consider. He'd rather face the early GCSE's with his group of mates & I think taking into account the kind of boy he is that's probably the lesser of two evils for him.


I guess you don't always need GCSE's, or even A levels to go onto further or Higher Ed? My neighbour home Ed's her two boys & I seem to recall her telling me that Home Ed-ers just need to be able to show/prove that they have the depth of knowledge and capacity for study that Higher academia needs - a portfolio of work for example. I suppose that with the Education system - like all big systems & institutions - there are always ways around the 'rules & regulations' because not everyone works within it, so there must be ways of enabling those people to join 'the system' should they want to?

The plural of anecdotes isn't data, but for what it's worth my August born brother was a classic late developer - middleish through most of primary school, terrible yr 9 results, ok GCSEs, good A levels, a first class degree at Uni and is now a research fellow at Oxford.

Yak Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The plural of anecdotes isn't data, but for what

> it's worth my August born brother was a classic

> late developer - middleish through most of primary

> school, terrible yr 9 results, ok GCSEs, good A

> levels, a first class degree at Uni and is now a

> research fellow at Oxford.


Thanks, you just made my day!:)) (mother of a late developer)

My story is that I entered school more academically 'advanced' i.e. I could read and in the 70's they thought it was a good idea for advanced kids to skip a grade! Worse thing ever - I was then a whole year younger than classmates, very insecure, found it hard to settle. Although I was quite bright according to all those standarised tests, I was never at the top in my class ever - and luckily I had parents who weren't stressed out by this.. I went on to an American University that had a focus on experiential, creative education and did very well and then onto to a Masters degree and have had a pretty successful career/life. Anyway, do watch the trailer to this film 'Race to Nowhere' all about the pressures on school children to be academically successful as opposed to become life-long creative learners.




Also Ken Robinson has some important points to make about our education system.


I was the typical late developer - bottom set streamed throughout primary school and most of comprehensive. Which if nothing else had dire consequences on my self-esteem, and still does. I then went on to get three As for A Level, a v good BA and then an MA. Now my son is at primary school and seems to be reliving somewhat my past - he's been streamed and is towards the bottom and is convinced he's stupid, though he palpably isn't (he's had cognitive intelligence tests done and scored on the 97th percentile for his age!). But...his intelligence isn't conventional, nor was mine, and as I have found, independence of thought doesn't get you very far at least till BA/higher education level.

suppose it depends what you call 'early'


I think judging children on an ability to read early is pointless as reading is a trick, rather like jumping, you get it when you get it


I think possibly year 3 or 4 primary is a better indicator of 'early development'


However a child with an enquiring mind or an ability to just work will probably remain so


and of course the peer group a teen falls into is important too

Curmudgeon Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> suppose it depends what you call 'early'

>

> I think judging children on an ability to read

> early is pointless as reading is a trick, rather

> like jumping, you get it when you get it

>

> I think possibly year 3 or 4 primary is a better

> indicator of 'early development'

>

> However a child with an enquiring mind or an

> ability to just work will probably remain so

>

> and of course the peer group a teen falls into is

> important too



Every child has an enquiring mind before they start school. A non-curious pre-schooler doesn't exist. That's how they learned to walk and talk. Unfortunately, school does a brilliant job of knocking the curiosity out of children through forcing them to learn in a very boring and repetitive way. The ability to work is a different thing. Some children are fine at working towards the teachers goals rather than their own and are happy enough with a sticker/grade or whatever other carrot they use. Yes, I think reading could be a good trick...it's a tool, not knowledge or learning itself. It's a way to find out information. Just one way and not the only way either. Hmmm, feeling rather cynical this morning!

How very interesting. Thank you for all your posts. J am starting to wonder if it is all about how some children learn and that, if that is in a non conventional way, they are more likely to lag behind and come through later on. That would fit with the boy thing as boys are less prepared to sit and concentrate on books indoors early on, ime.


Of course it begs the massive question - how do you measure intelligence- which is another issue entirely!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Does anyone know when the next SNT meeting is? I am fed up with my son being mugged on East Dulwich Grove! 
    • The issue must be everywhere at the moment. I was visiting a friend last week in Bermondsey, think we were walking  down Linton Rd & we dodged 7 dog poos. It was disgusting. 
    • Thanks for your message — I actually took the time to look into what CityHive does before posting my original comment, and I’d encourage anyone with questions to do the same. Yes, the Companies House filings are overdue — but from what I’ve gathered, this seems likely to be an accountant or admin issue, not some sign of ill intent. A lot of small, community-based organisations face challenges keeping up with formalities, especially when they’re focused on immediate needs like food distribution. Let’s not forget CityHive is a not-for-profit, volunteer-powered CIC — not a corporate machine. As for the directors, people stepping down or being replaced is often about capacity or commitment — which is completely normal in the voluntary and community sector. New directors are sometimes appointed when others can no longer give the time. It doesn’t automatically mean bad governance — it just means people’s circumstances change. CityHive’s actual work speaks volumes. They buy most of the food they distribute — fresh produce, essential groceries, and shelf-stable items — and then deliver it to food banks, soup kitchens, and community projects across London. The food doesn’t stay with CityHive — it goes out to local food hubs, and from there, directly to people who need it most. And while yes, there may be a few paid staff handling logistics or admin, there’s a huge volunteer effort behind the scenes that often goes unseen. Regular people giving their time to drive vans, sort donations, load pallets, pack food parcels — that’s what keeps things running. And when people don’t volunteer? Those same tasks still need to be done — which means they have to be paid for. Otherwise, the whole thing grinds to a halt. As the need grows, organisations like CityHive will inevitably need more support — both in people and funding. But the bigger issue here isn’t one small CIC trying to make ends meet. The real issue is the society we live in — and a government that isn’t playing its part in eradicating poverty. If it were, organisations like CityHive, The Felix Project, City Harvest, FareShare, and the Trussell Trust wouldn’t need to exist, let alone be thriving. They thrive because the need is growing. That’s not a reflection on them — it’s a reflection on a broken system that allows people to go hungry in one of the richest cities in the world. If you're in doubt about what they’re doing, go check their Instagram: @cityhivemedia. You’ll see the real organisations and people receiving food, sharing thanks, and showing how far the impact reaches. Even Southwark Foodbank has received food from CityHive — that alone should speak volumes. So again — how does any of this harm you personally? Why spend time trying to discredit a group trying to support those who are falling through the cracks? We need more people lifting others up — not adding weight to those already carrying the load.
    • Well, this is very disappointing. Malabar Feast  has changed its menu again. The delicious fish curry with sea bass no longer exists. There is now a fish dish with raw mango, which doesn't appeal. I had dal and spinach instead, which was bland (which I suppose I could/should have predicted). One of my visitors had a "vegetable Biriani" which contained hardly any vegetables. Along with it came two extremely tiny pieces of poppadom in a large paper bag.   This was embarrassing, as I had been singing Malabar's praises and recommending we ordered from there. The other mains and the parathas were OK, but I doubt we will be ordering from there again. My granddaughters wisely opted for Yard Sale pizzas, which were fine. Has anybody else had a similar recent poor (or indeed good!)  experience at Malabar Feast?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...