Earlier is not better

My personal disgust in the political decision to start school one year earlier

Last week I was trying to find more information, in Swedish, about what was happening with school start being pushed a year earlier - I was shocked to find next to nothing. Of course now there is an English article (after several in Swedish yesterday (hmm maybe they sensed be scouring cyberspace for information??)

I am extremely concerned that Sweden is doing the OPPOSITE of what the rest of the world is trying to do.

Instead of delaying school start (like the The Upstart mission in Scotland - of ensuring children have longer to not only learn while at play, but thrive because of their play, and be taught in playful ways) Sweden is seeking to start first grade a year early. This will require teachers to train specifically for this 2028 change to focus more on math, reading and writing.

Back in the early 1990s the preschool class was born (also called six year old setting - sexårsverksamhet) it was designed as a bridge between what was then called daycare and school - a year to practice being in school through play and to get to know other students/children - as a class often could comprise of children from different daycares and homes. The preschool class offers young children to get used to the school building, the different routines of school, using a dining hall, getting changed for gym/sports lessons and other routines connected to school that we often forget about.

In 1998 the education authority took over “daycare” (daghem or dagis) from social services and renamed it to preschool and gave us a curriculum - one rooted in play and without goals for the children - the goals were about what the teachers provide. I actually quite like the curriculum but even that has been giving me cause for concern.

In 2010 and 2018 the curriculum was updated - each time schoolifying it a bit more. For example instead of the word teaching the word instruction was introduced - in Swedish we have the word lära and lära ut for learning and teaching - in schools the word “undervisning” is used. Directly translated it mean under-show, it is an instructional form of teaching. One that I personally think is inappropriate for early childhood. Many tried to explain that “undervisning” in the early years is different and should be interpreted differently - and this just made me even more irritated. if we collectively know that we should be teaching differently in the early years than we do in schools, than why on earth are we using a school word?

This is something I tried pushing against. Both the school rhetoric in early childhood, but also this push to start first grade at age 6 instead of the current age 7 - but of course many Swedish teachers and parents, who have never experienced the stress of early school start were more excited about the early years gaining status than the effect it would have on children - I see these same dialogues happening in Ontario now - they seem to think that calling it preschool and using school words will increase the status of early years and young children - sadly experience here in Sweden has shown that instead of increasing our status in the early years it has pushed down school discipline and methods which are inappropriate for young developing brains and bodies while still not valuing young children or their teachers.

Starting grade one at six instead of seven will only lead to an increase in negative mental health issues. And there is the risk that a few years later 5 yr olds will be the new bridge between preschool and school. I called this out a few years ago… and I now see that this is starting to be mentioned in articles today. I would much rather that I was wrong.

I am on the advisory board of the DEY (Defending the Early Years) in the USA - so are some amazing people who are advocates of young children’s rights, the right to play, children’s well-being as well as right to education. Dr Dale Farran where her recent research in Tennessee has shown that children starting school-like learning too early are more likely to encounter problems later in life. That although initially there are benefits of less play and more teaching those disappear over a few years and are instead replaced with children more likely to disengage from learning, perform worse (as in get lower grades) more likely to need special education, more likely to get into trouble at school and more likely to get suspended from school than those children who got to play in their early years.

This clearly shows that earlier is not better.

My own daughters once joined a class in England for a week - the English children in the class had been attending school for 6 years, while my daughter’s had three years of schooling. The English teacher of the class was amazed that my daughters were not the least bit behind educationally/intellectually despite three years less schooling - and in fact despite three years less they were able to speak and do all of this learning in two languages.

My son on the other hand I feel should not have started formal schooling until he was about twelve. He simply needed longer to play to be able to work out social interactions, self regulate his own emotions and how to manage not being overwhelmed by the sensory overload of a classroom full of children. His autism/ADHD made the school system a place of torture and I admire him for enduring it. And I worry for children with diagnoses like autism and ADHD where essentially the brain needs longer to play - because the brain has not learned how to focus yet and needs more time to be able to do that before being able to sit and do lessons. How will these children cope when school, that is already failing these children in the thousands, will start even earlier and maybe add to this number of children who struggle because their brain has not matured enough to be able to focus the way they are being taught.

If the school system was to changed where there is a greater focus on flow - play and learning flow - where the children understand the vision of the school and are on board - then possibly I might not mind starting school earlier. The problem is that the school system from grade one upwards is authoritarian by nature - not democratic like it should be.

The Original Learning Approach strives to be a pedagogical, reflective practice that values children’s autonomy and play - and seeks to provide environments that encourage learning flow.

I am absolutely against the Swedish far right political party plans for first grade to be the year children turn 6 rather than 7.

I don’t think this will improve the quality of education. I do think investing more money for smaller classes where the teachers can facilitate children’s learning, help build good relationships between themselves and the children, and amongst the children where the children feel safe and brave to be curious and make mistakes in order to learn from them.

The workforce of the future (and even today) needs to be curious, creative, resilient and able to problem-solve - four qualities I think the current school system is depriving children from developing fully.

Play and autonomy are vital.

I also think that we need to be making schools attractive - not beautiful kind of attractive - but attractive like a magnet. That children want to be there. I think most schools, or education systems, in the world are failing at this. Sure some children love school - but shouldn’t we be striving for every child to enjoy learning?

In Sweden there is a lot of talk about gangs, and how to stop children from joining the gangs. Well, maybe, if schools were more attractive than gangs to provide a sense of value, importance, thrill, joy or whatever it is that those joining gangs are seeking - then we could be on a win win approach. Less gang members, less violence, more children in school and more learning - and yeah… maybe even those better grades that the governments are chasing to prove how good they are and what a difference they have made.

Schools need to be attractive to all children. Not just the normative child. There is a lot of anti-bias work that needs to be done - so instead of investing in teachers to be retrained so that they can teach maths, reading and writing to six year olds - why can’t we invest in training children for inclusive, anti-racist, anti-ableist, anti-sexist, anti-homophobic etc etc etc so that every child feels welcome and valued. So that every child can belong. So that we can create learning communities.

reading.

https://dey.org/early-developmental-competencies-or-why-pre-k-does-not-have-lasting-effects/

https://www.npr.org/2022/02/10/1079406041/researcher-says-rethink-prek-preschool-prekindergarten

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/sep/19/swedish-children-to-start-school-a-year-earlier-six

please add comments… would be wonderful to collate support against this decision - so any and all support welcome as well as links to research - which well then make this post a great source for everyone - not only trying to stop this change in Sweden, but for everyone seeking to stop academic pushdown

thank you