Tests for four-year-olds are counter-productive

It overlooks the wide differences in development at such a young age

Editorial
Thursday 12 September 2013 14:03 EDT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Formal schooling foisted on to young children is causing profound damage, according to a critique of the Government’s so-called “early years” policy from more than 100 teachers and education experts. Youngsters should not be starting school until they are six or seven, they say.

The response from the Education Secretary’s office is predictably robust, dismissing the claims as those of a “powerful and misguided lobby responsible for the devaluation of exams and the culture of low expectations in state schools”.

There are two issues here. One is education in general, and in this Michael Gove is right. “Bogus pop-psychology about self-image”, as his spokesman so colourfully put it yesterday, is indeed no substitute for facts. It is also true that greater educational rigour will benefit the poor more than the rich, who will get it anyway.

But that is not the issue here. This is about very young children, and they have different needs. Not only will the inadequacies of Britain’s schools not be solved simply by tacking on more years at the beginning. Such an approach is also outright counter-productive – as evidence from Scandinavia’s better-performing (and later-starting) youngsters makes clear. Furthermore, it overlooks the wide differences in development at such a young age – risking those children who lag at four never catching up.

Put simply, tiny children need play, not rigour; there is plenty of time for that later on. Mr Gove must not allow his justifiable desire to shake-up the education system to prevent him from differentiating the wood from the trees.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in