I'm honestly torn. I love having her home on the days I'm not teaching, but
she is loving preschool this year, loving her friends, and I think would
really like to do more. Would there be anything strongly favoring a shorter
or longer schedule for preschoolers?
She has a November birthday, which misses the October cutoff for schools
here but is in the window where many private schools accept students and a
waiver is possible for the public schools. Academically, she's already
higher on many skills than a lot of the entering students I had in the
public district, and socially she does well with older children and is very
independent and self sufficient, so at least right now, I'm seriously
considering entering her in kindergarten at almost 5 vs waiting until almost
6.
Suggestions from those who have BTDT?
Personally, I think the 2-day a week schedule is the
*worst*. They never really get into a good groove because it's
too long between school days. I think 3 days a week is a good
minimum, but of course scheduling makes that challenging. If
you use a room 3 days a week, then you have 2 days left over to
use ;-) The way our school works it out at one site is that
they have 2 2yo rooms and 3 3/4yo rooms. The 2yo rooms are
used for Mon/Thu and Tue/Fri classes, and then one of the
3-day 3yo classes moves to one of the 2yo rooms on Wednesday
so that they can pick up a 3rd day.
Anyway, the way it goes at our school is that 2yos
go for 2 days, 3yos for 3 days, and 4yos for 4 days. Everyone
goes for 3 hours (the 2s from 9-noon and the 3/4s from 9:15
to 12:15). I think the length of the school day is about
right, and I don't know why I'd want to pay a teacher to
watch my child nap if I didn't need the time.
For my first two, 3-4 days per week at 3 and 4
years old was just fine. For DD, she probably would have
liked more days per week. Right now she's going 4 days/week
at 4 years old, and she's ok with that, but could easily
go 5 days/week.
So, of your options, I would pick at least the
3-day option, and maybe the 5-day no nap option for next
year.
Best wishes,
Ericka
I'm with Ericka, I think 2 days a week is a bad idea.
If she can nap at home, there's no reason to let her nap there, because it
looks like they don't have much time for anything else afterwards, so
you're paying extra for just naptime.
My kids have done the 2, 3 and 5 day route and we all like 5 day best
because of the routine. My kids like to know where they're going each day
and they like school.
I would pick either the 3-day or the 5-day no-nap option. If you pick
5-day, you can always keep her home for the occasional extra day - at
least, I did when my 4-year-old was in a 5-morning-a-week program.
Clisby
My boys, both with August/September birthdays (just before the cutoff at
the time) did:
2-morning young 2's program. Very bad. They really needed 3 mornings
for the consistency. Both loved being there.
4-morning young 3's program. Both loved it and wanted to know why they
couldn't go on the 5th day, the way the older 3's did.
5-morning + 3 afternoon (til 2:30) 4's program, no nap. Both adored it.
Kindergarten and just 5 and nearl 5, respectively. Both thrived, and
are still thrving at 5th and 7th grades. (Both were clearly ready to
move from a play-based program to a more formal academic program when
they entered kindy.)
Your mileage may vary, of course :-)
--Beth Kevles
bethk...@aol.com
http://web.mit.edu/kevles/www/nomilk.html -- a page for the milk-allergic
Disclaimer: Nothing in this message should be construed as medical
advice. Please consult with your own medical practicioner.
NOTE: No email is read at my MIT address. Use the AOL one if you would
like me to reply.
Over here, you'd probably have a 4 day option as well, which is the one
I used for my kids. 5 days was too much until they were at least 4yo,
so given your options, I would probably have chosen 3 days without nap.
(FWIW, the classes over here are often mixed up. The 3yo 2-day children
would be in the same class as the 4/5 day 4yo children: exactly who
was in class with them would be different each day. OTOH, by the time
they are 5yo, they would be in school, going five days a week.)
The 3 or 5 day no nap options look good to me.
We chose less days of preschool because they would have missed out on
music classes, swimming lessons, gymnastics etc. depending on the
year.
> waiver is possible for the public schools. Academically, she's already
> higher on many skills than a lot of the entering students I had in the
> public district, and socially she does well with older children and is very
> independent and self sufficient, so at least right now, I'm seriously
> considering entering her in kindergarten at almost 5 vs waiting until almost
> 6.
It sounds like she will be way ahead whenever she starts K. Depending
on her preschool and your local K options, the environment in
preschool might be more enjoyable at age 4-5 than spending time on
academics that are already below her level. I might wait on starting
K and have another year with more time for whatever activities she
loves. She can always skip grades later etc. Depending on what grade
gifted programs start in and what kind are offered, starting later and
skipping a grade might get her into a gifted program at the same age
without spending as much time languishing in a non-stimulating
classroom beforehand.
--Betsy
I had a friend whose dd skipped from kindergarten to first grade after
being tested. She was clearly bright enough for first grade. However, my
friend would never choose that option had she had the opportunity to do it
all over.
It would have been better to start kindergarten early, because there was
lots of material, things that my friend never thought to teacher her dd,
that was missed by skipping and her dd had lots of catching up to do. It
was all minor, like adding horizontally vs. vertically, writing whole
pages, etc. It was nothing the child couldn't learn quickly because she
was bright, but it all added up and the process of skipping was stressful,
though she caught up within a couple of months.
In our state, with a November birthday, entering school at age 4 would be
the right age. Entering at 5 would be considered redshirting. I would say
enter her at age 4. She sounds ready. Enter her later and she might be
bored, like my friend's child.
our DS is 6months older than your DD, so we're in this place right now!
We originally planned for him to be in 5 day a week preschool this year,
it seemed like a good idea at the time, then I realised how unflexible
it would be. Given we have part time kindergarten here, there's a
possibility of the following year being unflexible, so we withdrew him,
from the 2 day program (same school, they have a 2 day drama and
literature class which can only be done in addition to another class).
So that's why we didn't want 5 days, it may be different for you. I'd
run a mile from the 5 longer days, even if you do pull her out before
nap time, my personal feeling is that even if your child isn't there the
full time, those kind of hours turn it much more into a daycare setting,
which obviously might be what some people need. Having said that, our
preschool allows the children to stay for lunch 3 days of the week, they
take there own lunch and it makes the morning 4hrs, rather than 2.5, but
it's more like a separate thing than an extension of class, there is
just one group, but 4 morning classes. I'd be inclined to tick the 3 day
9-12.30 box - sometimes it's easier if you don't have options and you
just have to choose from what's available, there are pros and cons of
everything!
Cheers
Anne
5 days from shortly after age 3 in the UK, we got 3 weeks of it, not
knowing when our visas would be issued, we went through all the
orientation and what not, we were told that many many children would
take one day off per week and a lot of them simply couldn't manage 5
days, particularly at the beginning of the year. We've swung from one
extreme to the other, DS would have started full time school last week
in the UK, here (WA) he starts part time school next year, the exact
same amount of time as he got a full year ago in the UK. I'm mightily
relieved he isn't starting school now, he's got noticeably tired by
increase in activity levels in the last 10 days, so how on earth he'd
have coped with full time school I do not know!
Cheers
Anne
> My DD is currently in a 2 day a week program for older 2s/young 3s. Her
> program has asked us to do a survey on which options we'd prefer for next
> fall. The options are:
> 2 day a week, 9:00-2:30, including a nap time (this is what she's on now,
> although I usually pick her up before nap since she doesn't nap much
> anymore)
> 3 day a week 9:00-12:30, no nap
> 5 day a week 9:00-12:30
> 5 day a week 9:00-2:30
>
> I'm honestly torn. I love having her home on the days I'm not teaching, but
> she is loving preschool this year, loving her friends, and I think would
> really like to do more. Would there be anything strongly favoring a shorter
> or longer schedule for preschoolers?
Practicalities. It's great having her in pre-school while you are teaching,
but there are other things to consider. Would it be convenient, for example,
for her to have more time there so that you can do things like have the car
serviced, have your Pap smear, buy clothing (especially bras), attend
concerts/lectures, visit distressed friends/relatives, and so on? Now you can
do these things with a preschooler, but sometimes it's a lot easier without
them! But I'm speaking as one who pretty much doesn't have babysitters, so
these things might not be problems for you.
If you are considering the naptime days, it might be as well to find out what
they plan on doing with children who don't take naps.
> She has a November birthday, which misses the October cutoff for schools
> here but is in the window where many private schools accept students and a
> waiver is possible for the public schools. Academically, she's already
> higher on many skills than a lot of the entering students I had in the
> public district, and socially she does well with older children and is very
> independent and self sufficient, so at least right now, I'm seriously
> considering entering her in kindergarten at almost 5 vs waiting until almost
> 6.
I think you *are* better off sending her young. Even if the academics are too
easy, there is still the rest of school life (lining up, bells, packed
lunches, teachers, etc) to learn about. After she's settled in, you can
negotiate about acceleration. It is more striking when the teacher *knows*
the child is on the young side and they are doing things that are typical of
much older children -- teachers trust their own observations more than they do
the assertions of parents.
--
Chookie -- Sydney, Australia
(Replace "foulspambegone" with "optushome" to reply)
"Parenthood is like the modern stone washing process for denim jeans. You may
start out crisp, neat and tough, but you end up pale, limp and wrinkled."
Kerry Cue
<snip>
> I think you *are* better off sending her young. Even if the academics are too
> easy, there is still the rest of school life (lining up, bells, packed
> lunches, teachers, etc) to learn about. After she's settled in, you can
> negotiate about acceleration. It is more striking when the teacher *knows*
> the child is on the young side and they are doing things that are typical of
> much older children -- teachers trust their own observations more than they do
> the assertions of parents.
A teacher may be unaware of what a child can do beyond the level of
what she teaches in class. My son (turned 4 in July) can read at a
first grade level (Dr. Seuss books, for example), but in his
kindergarten class they are practicing letters and colors. Next year,
at least, I hope he will be in 1st grade rather than kindergarten. His
mother and I teach him closer to his intellectual level, and I think
we have a better idea of what he is capable of. Research on gifted
children have found that it is important to use tests that cover above-
grade-level material to determine where they are and what they should
study. A recent study found that the SAT scores of gifted 7th and 8th
graders are predictive of their future career paths ("Can Early SAT
Scores Predict a Gifted Kid's Path?" http://giftedexchange.blogspot.com/
) .
> A teacher may be unaware of what a child can do beyond the level of
> what she teaches in class. My son (turned 4 in July) can read at a
> first grade level (Dr. Seuss books, for example), but in his
> kindergarten class they are practicing letters and colors. Next year,
> at least, I hope he will be in 1st grade rather than kindergarten.
You don't "hope". You go in there and negotiate. Preferably before the
teachers are in the throes of report-writing.
> His
> mother and I teach him closer to his intellectual level, and I think
> we have a better idea of what he is capable of.
As a rule, yes -- parents do have a better idea of their gifted child's
capacities than the average teacher. Teachers with additional training in
gifted ed do get better at picking out G&T kids, and a perceptive teacher
would pick up very quickly that your child was already reading. But those are
school teachers, not preschool teachers (they receive different levels of
training in Australia). I am not sure whether by "kindergarten" you mean
proper school or preschool. At one day care, a carer told me that DS1 was
advanced because of the enriched environment that I was able to provide for
him!
Admittedly, I had noted in DS1's admission papers that he had taught himself
to read, but within two weeks, his teacher was getting him to read out notices
to her -- not notices directed to the children, but the administrative notices
written to her! I have no doubt that she had a similar grasp of the skills of
each child in that classroom.
> Research on gifted
> children have found that it is important to use tests that cover above-
> grade-level material to determine where they are and what they should
> study. A recent study found that the SAT scores of gifted 7th and 8th
> graders are predictive of their future career paths ("Can Early SAT
> Scores Predict a Gifted Kid's Path?" http://giftedexchange.blogspot.com/
> ) .
Actually, the blog indicated that that approach should be used with caution!
Because I am 2e myself, I'm well aware of what happens when you've got
skills below grade level and ones which are way above grade level. Guess
which tend to get attention? Guess which tend to dominate your view of
yourself. It wasn't until secondary, where I could really start typing
everything, that I started to have teachers who seemed to appreciate and
understand that I was more than bad handwriting and an inability to sit
still (I have athetoid CP-unless I constantly focus, my muscles move even
while I'm asleep. Even with an IEP, I still heard "Stop fidgeting! Sit
still" practically every day of elementary school).
It's so much easier to grade accelerate when the child is older and the
physical requirements have largely levelled out (let's face it, there's
little difference between physical requirements for middle school, high
school, and college except for the size of the campus. The difference comes
in level of material, but as long as you can write reasonably legibly and
quickly without excessive fatigue and type papers, you're probably OK for
whatever level you're cognitively capable of). But in those early years, I'm
very concerned about accelerating just due to the physical side-and it has
been my experience that the social and physical often go together to some
degree at the elementary school level where a lot of the social
relationships are formed at the dance studio or on the playing field.
> Because I am 2e myself, I'm well aware of what happens when you've got
> skills below grade level and ones which are way above grade level. Guess
> which tend to get attention? Guess which tend to dominate your view of
> yourself. It wasn't until secondary, where I could really start typing
> everything, that I started to have teachers who seemed to appreciate and
> understand that I was more than bad handwriting and an inability to sit
> still (I have athetoid CP-unless I constantly focus, my muscles move even
> while I'm asleep. Even with an IEP, I still heard "Stop fidgeting! Sit
> still" practically every day of elementary school).
>
Did you know that scientists have found a "fidget gene?"
Blame the genes!!!
Debbie
<snip>
> Because I am 2e myself, I'm well aware of what happens when you've got
> skills below grade level and ones which are way above grade level. Guess
> which tend to get attention? Guess which tend to dominate your view of
> yourself. It wasn't until secondary, where I could really start typing
> everything, that I started to have teachers who seemed to appreciate and
> understand that I was more than bad handwriting and an inability to sit
> still.
Off the main topic, but I wonder if cursive writing is something that
still needs to be taught. Now that keyboards are ubiquitous, cursive
writing seems like calligraphy to me. I don't write (rather than type)
too often, and I only use cursive to sign my name.
The big reason I can see for teaching both is that while cursive is easier
in many cases and faster, it doesn't match "book print" and therefore
children who have trouble learning to read will probably find it easier to
read. Having said this, I've discovered that my daughter can read script
fonts and some pretty ornate fonts in advertising and printed things, so
maybe it's not an issue. Or maybe my daughter's just odd in this regard, as
in so many others.
As a preschool teacher, I think 2 days is the worst schedule.
She will be an older 3 next year? If so, I would opt for the 5 day
schedule for the mornings and have her home for lunch (and nap
if she decides to nap because the activity level is high).
I think that 9 to 2:30 is better for 4 year olds than for 3 year olds.
Kids need down time and quiet time at school doesn't really provide
that because they are still in a group. Of course, it will depend on
the personality of the child.
--
Dorothy
There is no sound, no cry in all the world
that can be heard unless someone listens ..
The Outer Limits