Kinder program in childcare if funding isn't approved?

[Green Cheese]

So have her pre-school said she's ready or she's not ready? If they say she's ready, why hold her back because that's what others on here are doing or saying?

You and your DDs teachers know her best and if they say she's ready and you also feel she's ready, then why not send her?

The preschool haven't mentioned any concerns, and we will send her next year. But when you are exposed to constant comments both on here and within our mothers group about the great benefits to holding her back then it's making me panic that I'm setting her up to fail. I have found schools (where as well as when) one of the biggest most confusing decisions so far for my daughter.

[harvs]

@Green Cheese for what it's worth I would have no issues sending my son if he were to turn five within the first two weeks...

For me, my options are to send him in July (4 yrs 9 months) or January (5 years 3 months). To me, that's enough of a difference to choose to send him in January. So very different to your scenario.

The children I've spoken about in my teaching experience aren't children who turn five within two weeks, but those who don't turn five until May.

Even then, you know your own child best, and I would put my faith in that if I were you.

[VicPark]

The preschool haven't mentioned any concerns, and we will send her next year. But when you are exposed to constant comments both on here and within our mothers group about the great benefits to holding her back then it's making me panic that I'm setting her up to fail. I have found schools (where as well as when) one of the biggest most confusing decisions so far for my daughter.

Don't feel guilty. Parent to your child not a philosophy. Trust the opinion of your child's teachers and don't let yourself be swayed by a trend alone.

[FearlessLeader]

Well this thread has gone off topic but here's my 2 cents (which you've already heard, OP!) my DS is 'silly' and immature. He is also highly intelligent. He started when he was 4 and 11 months and is now in Grade One. I can see a difference between him and his peers in terms of maturity, but it's nowhere near the difference between him and the kids in the year below. I can't imagine having held him back. He would have been literally held back. All his academic and even social markers are on the same level as the rest of his grade level, according to his reports. He is even taking extended maths, and his teachers are quite astounded by his maths abilities which are streets ahead of his peers (at least 18 months above the rest of the class). I sometimes wonder whether the trend of keeping kids back because of social immaturity doesn't take into enough account academic readiness. My DS would have been bored out of his brains going to kinder for another year.
It seems to me there's actually something wrong with the entire system, that maybe we are expecting too much emotionally from all children, who may be really to learn formally but can't necessarily cope with the demands of formal learning as it happens in Australia currently. Surely there's an argument that they way we teach young children needs to change, not that we should hold kids back because they don't entirely fit the current mould?

[Catzilla]

Surely there's an argument that they way we teach young children needs to change, not that we should hold kids back because they don't entirely fit the current mould?

Totally with you there. Why can't we alter the current mould or make a whole new one, instead of expecting every kid to squeeze into the current mould.

Being in SA, and born in early June, Miss 2 won't be eligible to start school until she's almost 5 years and 8 months old. Being still so young, I've got no idea if she'd be academically and socially ready to start a year earlier in 2019 instead of 2020; but by the current SA guidelines, I couldn't to the best of my limited knowledge send her in 2019 no matter how ready she might be.

[A-Squared]

She wouldn't be eligible to start the year she turns 5 as the cut off is the last day in April, so you're right you can't send her in 2019 (if that's the year she turns 5) but she MUST start in 2020 because all children must be at school the year they turn 6. So it's impossible to send her 'early' they won't let her in. But if you were to delay her, she would be going late.

[Catzilla]

Yep. She turns 5 in early June 2019, so she must start in 2020, and can't go any earlier or later than that.

[A-Squared]

Yep. She turns 5 in early June 2019, so she must start in 2020, and can't go any earlier or later than that.

At least then you don't have a decision to make, you send her the one year she is eligible to start.

Which makes it even sillier that it depends on the month your child was born in a given year as to whether you have a decision or you don't have a decision.

There should be a blanket starting age, across all states and the child must be that age at 1 January and the curriculum should be based around that starting age. Seems pretty simple to me.

[2BlueBirds]

At least then you don't have a decision to make, you send her the one year she is eligible to start.

Which makes it even sillier that it depends on the month your child was born in a given year as to whether you have a decision or you don't have a decision.

There should be a blanket starting age, across all states and the child must be that age at 1 January and the curriculum should be based around that starting age. Seems pretty simple to me.

I agree that the starting age be the same for all states.
However if we make it January 1, won't we still have the same issues ? If a child turns 5 in December the parents may argue that some kids will be turning six in January therefore they'll hold them back, so again, they are not the youngest.
So will still have a 11-12 month gap.
I guess it avoids children starting at the age of four though.

When I was younger you started if you turned 5 by June and nearly everyone just followed this guide. Now it's April.

I get what you're saying though, it needs to be easier.

[Green Cheese]

There should be a blanket starting age, across all states and the child must be that age at 1 January and the curriculum should be based around that starting age. Seems pretty simple to me.

I think the theory behind having a choice is good, not all kids are the same based on what date they were born. If used correctly those 4 months(based on vic which is end April) would mean that the kids who need a bit longer are able to do so without being too difficult and the kids who don't need it can go when they are 5/almost 5.

If you have a child who you feel is genuinely behind their peers, like they've had speech delays or behavioural issues, then everyone else also starts their child when they have just turned 6 to give them an edge well then your child is not gaining the benefits of the extra year. I dunno, does that make sense?