The wisdom of Mr. Gove.

[Flosshilde]

I see that Mr Gove is recommending London as a wonderful place to live because of all the 'hot sex' available. Is he speaking from experience, or anecdotal evidence (like so many of his policies)? Would any London-based message boareder care to confirm his belief?

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

A child who at five is not toilet-trained and can't walk properly, and whose verbal skills are severely restricted because they've never been talked to, is not just 'below average' in developmental terms.

People who have children and then neglect them really should not have had them in the first place. But curing that particular problem is more easily said than done.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

I see that Mr Gove is recommending London as a wonderful place to live because of all the 'hot sex' available. Is he speaking from experience, or anecdotal evidence (like so many of his policies)? Would any London-based message boareder care to confirm his belief?

Could you provide a link?

[Flosshilde]

Could you provide a link?

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/shortcuts/2014/apr/07/michael-gove-hot-sex-london-cabinet

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/news/loads-of-hot-sex-michael-gove-on-why-young-business-people-come-to-london-9242144.html

(I was rather worried Googling 'Gove hot sex' - fortunately the first few result were newspaper reports)

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

He discredits himself time and again Maybe this time...

[Serial_Apologist]

I see that Mr Gove is recommending London as a wonderful place to live because of all the 'hot sex' available. Is he speaking from experience, or anecdotal evidence (like so many of his policies)? Would any London-based message boareder care to confirm his belief?

He won't find any in my place!

[Serial_Apologist]

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/...london-cabinet

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/news/loads-of-hot-sex-michael-gove-on-why-young-business-people-come-to-london-9242144.html

(I was rather worried Googling 'Gove hot sex' - fortunately the first few result were newspaper reports)

I was rather wondering what he had in his mouth in the Indie shot - apart from somebody's teeth, from his expression...

[ardcarp]

A child who at five is not toilet-trained

Did anyone hear the News Quiz on Friday (R4)? They were having a go at Gove's latest thing, and one panelist said, "Of course you can always tell an adult who wasn't potty-trained. They just squat down and have a dump wherever they happen to be...."

[Flosshilde]

I do think that all these hang-ups about toilet training indicate an underlying problem in the psyches of those who are worried. As ardcarp's post suggests children learn to use a lavatory before too long. What does it matter if they're five and a half, or six, before they learn?

I think the main problem is that in the UK children are sent to school too young.

[jean]

I do think that all these hang-ups about toilet training indicate an underlying problem in the psyches of those who are worried. As ardcarp's post suggests children learn to use a lavatory before too long. What does it matter if they're five and a half, or six, before they learn?

I think the main problem is that in the UK children are sent to school too young.

And I think it would be useful to talk to the people who have to cope on a daily basis with children who suffer these sorts of multiple deprivation before you conclude that everything's all right really.

I have pointed out several times in the course of this thread that what's being suggested is not that two-year-olds should be 'sent to school'.

OFSTED (not Gove) has said that while good nursery education would help these multiply-deprived children to catch up with their peers, too much of the nursery education that's being offered isn't good enough.

They then suggest (more controversially) that given this, nurseries within primary schools would provide a better start.

Then (more controversially still) they suggest that these nurseries should be staffed by graduates.

There's plenty to discuss here, but most of the responses on this thread have been polarised along the lines of 'parents of such children shouldn't have had them in first place' as opposed to 'everything will sort itself out and there's no need to worry'.

I think both responses are easy oversimplifications.

I haven't got an answer, but I do know there's a problem.

[jean]

...The young people I met today would make anyone weep
I'm not sure that if they were sent to school at age 2 it would have made any difference at all

Could we just get away from sent to school at age 2?

I have taught, or tried to teach, very challenging (that's the word, isn't it?) young people, too. I have never worked in a PRU but I have worked with pupils who were heading there - possibly (who knows?) all the faster because I was trying to teach them.

But they were always already adolescents when I met them. I wasn't aware until recently of how some children came to primary school reception classes.

At the level of deprivation we are talking about, do you really think that just leaving them at home for a further two years would sort everything? I don't.

[MrGongGong]

Could we just get away from sent to school at age 2?

I have taught, or tried to teach, very challenging (that's the word, isn't it?) young people, too. I have never worked in a PRU but I have worked with pupils who were heading there - possibly (who knows?) all the faster because I was trying to teach them.

But they were always already adolescents when I met them. I wasn't aware until recently of how some children came to primary school reception classes.

At the level of deprivation we are talking about, do you really think that just leaving them at home for a further two years would sort everything? I don't.

how would I know ?
You seem to think i'm just a middle class pesto muncher anyway

I don't think that sending children to school at age 2 would make any difference to real problems.
I've been aware how some children come to school and have done for many years and have worked in many of these places (as well as PRU's, secure units, child psychiatry units and so on)

No one suggested that children NOT going to school earlier would solve the problems
but maybe NOT withdrawing funding from services that DO address these problems would be a start?

'everything will sort itself out and there's no need to worry'.

who said that ?

some people jump to conclusions and see false dichotomies everywhere :-(

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

OFSTED (not Gove) has said that while good nursery education would help these multiply-deprived children to catch up with their peers, too much of the nursery education that's being offered isn't good enough.

They then suggest (more controversially) that given this, nurseries within primary schools would provide a better start.

Then (more controversially still) they suggest that these nurseries should be staffed by graduates.

It isn't often I find myself in agreement with anything Judas Iscariot's OFSTED has said, but the graduate thing is surely right, in that since Surestart (good in someways) began, many nurseries have been no better than playgroups, staffed by people with no in-depth knowledge of child development.
My concern is the Gove/Willshaw style of teaching by unimaginative methods of 50 or more years ago: "fill the pot; don't light the candle".

[Flosshilde]

'everything will sort itself out and there's no need to worry'.

who said that ? (

To be fair to Jean, I did, sort of. Because, bye & large, it's true.

[Flosshilde]

many nurseries have been no better than playgroups, staffed by people with no in-depth knowledge of child development.

This is unfair to playgroups, which, as far as I can remember, were set up & run by parents - & some of them had in-depth experience of child development (because they had older children). THey weren't intended to 'educate' children. An important element was the peer support it provided for parents & help in understanding the fact that children didn't follow the development pattern the experts said they should (& if we are into anecdotal evidence, friends have three children; the middle one was walking very early but is still in nappies; the youngest doesn't seem to be bothered much about walking yet, but her parents aren't worried - they know it will happen).

The problem with sending all children to a formal, government-supported institution at two is that it's a sledge-hammer-to-crack-a-nut situation. Most children won't need it. They will inevitably have a formal structure with targets/tests.

Still, the experts & the government know best. Perhaps they should just take children away from their parents at birth & rear them in special units where they will only encounter government-approved experts who will have them on a strict programme to ensure that they can all walk, shit in the right place, tie laces, hold pens etc at the right age according to programme.