What if we had a measure that could prevent dropouts in school and working life, equalize inequality and reduce the pressure on mental health care for children and young people? What if this measure is primarily about a change in attitude? Every year, over 50,000 expectant children walk into the classroom for the very first time. Thousands of them shouldn’t be there yet. They should have been given one more year in kindergarten to develop cognitively, socially and emotionally. They currently do not have the same prerequisites for handling the transition to school, and this unfortunate start can affect them well into their schooling, perhaps for the rest of their lives. It is pointless to repeat the same mistake and expect a different result. Nevertheless, we send these children out into an everyday life with a lack of coping, powerlessness and unreasonable expectations. There are big differences in how school-ready children are. Girls are often ahead of boys academically, socially and linguistically when they start school, a difference that persists. Factors such as home environment, personality, parents’ education and nursery quality also come into play. In any case, the most important thing is not why the differences are there, but to recognize that they exist. Mental difficulties and disorders often arise in the gap between requirements and prerequisites. We know that boys born late in the year are more likely to receive an ADHD diagnosis than other children. Immaturity and a late date of birth should be grounds for delayed school start, not referral to BUP. There are many reasons why people develop mental health problems, but date of birth should not be one of them. Mental disorders rarely occur in a vacuum, but starting school too early should not be the main reason. This is not about teacher competence. The teachers we have are more than capable enough. Nor is it about how many students there should be in the classroom (although up to 30 first-graders in the same classroom is excessive). It is about the wide gap between students in maturity and skills found in a classroom. It is challenging enough to ensure academic and social mastery for everyone in the transition to school, without the teacher also having to look after students who actually need a different learning environment. What can we do about it? If we really took the knowledge we have seriously, all boys should start school a year later than girls. However, such a universal measure could be both invasive and not very accurate. Such a measure will certainly reach all boys who need an extra year, but also many who do not. And what about the girls? Although boys at group level are more immature, many girls also need the same rights and consideration in view of the delayed start of school. A more targeted solution would be if all kindergartens and parents take an active position on postponed school starts if they have a child born after 1 October. It should also be possible to make this decision without having to connect with other agencies, as is the practice today. Here we should trust that parents and/or daycare know the children best, also for children born earlier in the year. Something as random as being born before or after January 1 shouldn’t have as big an impact on a child’s life as it can have today. Increased flexibility in these assessments benefits everyone – be it the children, the parents, the nursery school, the school and society in general. We need a change of attitude! Parents and kindergartens must be able to stand firm in their assessments, without having to worry that the children will stand out negatively because they were born a year before their classmates. We must give the children the benefit of the doubt. We must give the children who need it another year for their psychosocial development, and stop pushing them into everyday life without a sense of mastery. By lowering the threshold for making this decision, we will also help to remove the taboo many parents feel they inflict on their child. It is not impossible. In Denmark, 10–15 percent of children delay starting school. In Norway, the figure is 0.6 per cent. There is no reason to believe that Norway has up to 25 times fewer children who need an extra year. What will this cost? In the short term, more nursery places will be required. With full nursery coverage and fewer births, there is probably already capacity. But it will require political will to spend money on maintaining this capacity. It will require political long-termism to spend money in the nursery sector when the long-term gains will take place in schools, psychiatry and working life. Dropping out of school and working life has enormous social and financial costs. Postponing the start of school is an investment that will pay off in the long run. Let’s deal with the stigma around delayed school start and give all children a real chance to succeed! Send us your opinion Want to write? Feel free to contact us at news Ytring with your post. The guidelines can be found here. Published 21.11.2024, at 12.28
ttn-69
Let the children be ready for school – Statement
