FEATURE READY FOR SCHOOL? Ready for school?


Large numbers of children arrive at school without the skills they need to succeed. Helen Victoria Smith says practices and policies need to change to ensure all children have a positive start to school and all parents feel empowered to support their children’s learning


been a key part of successive UK governments’ approaches to raising educational achievement and promoting economic progress. But concerns around large numbers of children arriving at school without the skills they need to succeed have been steadily growing. These have been exacerbated by government data which show a persistent attainment gap between poorer children and their better-off peers. At the same time, government policy has promoted the idea that parents who provide the right sort of home- learning environment significantly influence their children’s ‘school readiness’.


M “ An institutional approach to


early education was promoted over more informal learning


In this context, my research revealed how mothers of children under five and early years’ professionals understood the concept of ‘school readiness’ and how this shaped what they did. A key finding was that the way support was offered to and experienced by mothers was different depending on the places they went. As a result, children from particular families were less likely to achieve the ‘school readiness’ required for academic success. Data were collected as part of a larger PhD ethnographic study that set out to explore how mothers used and experienced the resources provided by a small town in the East Midlands to support their children’s literacy development. National and local statistics characterised the town as suffering from considerable economic and educational deprivation. Various settings were explored: Sure Start Children’s Centres; private parent and child classes; the public library; and preschools. The professionals working in the Children’s Centres talked about how children from families (particularly those living in one of the two social housing estates) were not ‘school-ready’. They painted a picture of children starting school in nappies, unable to use a knife and fork, and with a dummy. They blamed this on parents for putting children in front of the television from a very


28 SOCIETY NOW AUTUMN 2018 ”


AKING SURE CHILDREN have the right opportunities for learning and development in their earliest years so they can be ‘school-ready’ has


young age, giving them dummies, and not talking or reading to them. These views shaped the way support was


offered to parents who were seen to be ‘deficient’ and lacking in knowledge. They were likely to be identified by a professional such as a midwife, health visitor or social worker as ‘in need of support’ and then referred to the Sure Start Children’s Centres where they were offered a ‘pathway’ of courses designed to teach them the skills and knowledge they were seen to lack. Professionals taught them how their child’s learning and development related to the different areas of learning in the Early Years Foundation Stage Framework and mothers were given a ‘learning journey’ to complete with photographs of their child engaging in activities related to the different areas of learning, or as evidence that they had reached a particular milestone. This was also formally tracked and kept on record, so if a child was failing to meet a particular milestone extra support could be put in place. This practice enabled the professionals to


indirectly monitor how well mothers were learning the lessons they were being taught and meant that the professionals decided what support could and should be offered. Instruction for the mothers usually took place away from the children, who were looked after in a crèche. Mothers, rather than the children, were made the focus of teaching. However, many of the groups suffered from


low attendance figures, and those who turned up often fell away before the course was finished. Professionals expressed concern that they were not always able to engage the mothers whom they felt would benefit most. But professionals from other settings and some mothers felt that by targeting and labelling families as ‘vulnerable’ and ‘in need’ of support, a stigma has now grown around the use of Children’s Centres with families not wanting to be identified in this way. Additionally, some mothers did not subscribe


to the idea that they needed to be ‘taught’ a lesson. One mother commented that the professional who ran her group was too ‘school-mistressy’ and that the sessions were like being at school. It appeared that the way support was offered in the Children’s Centres alienated parents and had no direct benefit to their children. Despite the emphasis on the importance of parents in getting their children ‘school-ready’, the ‘pathway’ of courses stopped once children turned


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40