I was going to write about something entirely different this week but the passionate response I received from readers to my last post got me thinking further about this matter, specifically the way we discipline our kids today compared to in the past.

I was honestly surprised to discover how many of you felt that smacking was a necessary step in disciplining your children. But I was even more surprised that it was not just the older generation saying this but parents of young children.

Certainly there were many readers who felt, as I do, that smacking a child is wrong for the reasons I pointed out. However, just as many felt that the lack of smacking was part of the ’soft’ approach to parenting that is contributing to a generation of spoilt, badly behaved, disrespectful children.

I don’t wish to generalise about children today as the vast majority of them are bright, inquisitive, loving and well-behaved (most of the time!) However, it is undeniable that the behaviour you would find at your local school is very different now to 30 years ago when smacking and even the cane was accepted practice.

So it begs the question, have we gone too soft? And has the decline in physical punishment played a part, or has something else changed?

Personally, I wonder if rather than it being a smack that kids are crying out for these days it is our time? If we have become so stressed and busy in our complicated lives we’re depriving our children of the one thing they so desperately need, our attention.

One of the comments on the previous blog stated that while physical punishment is not ideal, emotional punishment such as verbal abuse can be far more damaging and I wholeheartedly agree. But I believe even more damaging is the child who receives no punishment at all because nobody noticed the behaviour in the first place.

Maybe the kids we complain about who roam the streets causing trouble would benefit from a smack, not because of the smack, but because it meant someone cared enough to punish them.

You have to wonder if we’ve gone from one extreme to the other, from imposing punishments that were overly harsh to having no consequences at all. Or are we better parents than the previous generation because we have learnt to respect our children’s rights and allow them opinions and choices?

I guess I sit somewhere in the middle. I don’t want to be too ’soft’ and let my son run free with no rules or limits, but I also want to allow him to express his feelings even if it means the occasion tantrum is the result of it. I know some days I feel like throwing one!

Interestingly, many of you commented that often the best way to dissolve a toddler tantrum is to talk to your child and see what the problem is rather than punishing the naughty behaviour. But couldn’t we apply this to disruptive behaviour from a child of any age?

If you looked into the background of a teenager who is fighting at school you would most likely find some serious emotional issues hidden under all that aggression. Thirty years ago that child would probably have been given the cane and a stern talking to. These days they would most likely be expelled, leaving them to fall between the cracks, branded as a failure and set for an uphill battle to prove otherwise. As much as I abhor the thought of the cane you do have to wonder which is potentially more damaging to that child’s future.

I certainly don’t claim to be an expert, but in my opinion using praise to reward a child for good behaviour is a powerful tool. I believe children inherently want to do well to make us proud and will do whatever it takes to capture and hold our attention. So it stands to reason if they get more of our focus when they do the wrong thing than when they behave they will act up every time, whether they are two or fifteen.

On the other hand, you don’t want to praise them so much they end up with an over inflated ego thinking they can do no wrong. Perhaps some of the kids we see auditioning for Australian Idol could have benefited from a little more honesty and a little less praise! It’s all about balance.

That’s the thing with parenting, there’s no manual, no right or wrong way and you don’t get a second chance. You just do the best you can with what you know at the time and hope like hell it is enough. The only thing I know for sure of is you can never say ‘I love you’ too much, or hug too many times. That is the one thing that will never change.

Source: Sydney Morning Herald, Australia
http://tinyurl.com/4xwywf

I’ve taught a fifth-grade Sunday school class for years, and my kids mostly seem to like me. That’s so, I suspect, mostly because rarely am I smarter or more mature than a fifth-grader. Invariably, likability breeds the threat of hugs.

Yes, threat. Should a little angel with outstretched arms come my way, two scenarios may unreel:

OK. I’m exaggerating. I just walk very fast. Sad as it is, in many folks’ minds, the mere mention of male mentors triggers an Amber Alert. And this air of suspicion has benched some men who in years past had stepped in to mentor kids with absent or disengaged dads.

Still, University of Florida sociologist William Marsiglio says there are men investing in kids and communities. It’s the subject of his new book, Men on a Mission: Valuing Youth Work in Our Communities.

“Men who clearly exploit kids are out there, and we need to be concerned about them,” he says, “but there are thousands and millions of men interested in and capable of . . . creating this cultural narrative that kids are important and men have as much responsibility in helping this generation as women.”

For his book, Marsiglio interviewed 55 men who served as coaches, schoolteachers, youth ministers, camp counselors, Scout leaders and volunteers with programs such as Big Brothers Big Sisters of America.

Their backgrounds and pursuits were diverse, but their motivation largely was the same:

“They wanted them [youths] to embrace this gift of giving so it didn’t stop,” Marsiglio says.

That proved more important than worrying about dirty looks and whispers. Not that the men didn’t feel the glare.

“Some were annoyed,” Marsiglio says, “but most understood, though felt strapped by it.”

Many never shook hands with kids. Some stuffed their hands in their pockets or held items to dissuade kids from reaching out.

I won’t mourn the demise of the dubious congratulatory swat on the butt some coaches deliver to young athletes. But these days, the no-touching rules in youth sports can even be interpreted to extend to high-fives.

Marsiglio agrees that the pendulum has swung too far. And it’s robbing kids of encouragement a pat on the back conveys.

“Putting your hand on a kid’s shoulder, high-fives . . . can be a very empowering experience that reinforces the positive connection that men have with kids,” he says.

No easy answers exist to counter the media-hyped notion that Americans face a predator around every corner, he says. But he says the solution probably is anchored in common sense.

“Giving a kid a side-hug with 10 other folks around should raise fewer flags than something that might be done in private,” he says.

The National Fatherhood Initiative soon will reveal a new study that explores the collateral damage of a father’s absence and puts the annual public costs of it to the federal government at $100 billion.

Male mentoring, though not a panacea, long has stood in the gap. I doubt that even Uncle Sam’s deep pockets can afford the cost our communities will pay if the prevailing climate continues to force stand-up men to sit down.

Source: Orlando Sentinel, FL
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/orl-owens0708jun07,0,4787136.column

Dear Dr. Batya,

As hard as we try not to, it seems inevitable that we end up fighting in front of our kids. They get upset and at times even try and intervene. Do you think our quarrelling has negative consequences for the kids or do they see us as just having different opinions and an open yet heated discussion?

Children have the potential to learn a tremendous amount by watching how two adults disagree and handle conflict, an inevitability in even every good marriage. How well they will do and whether they will be adversely impacted depends in part on how you resolve your arguments, the tone these arguments take, how well you get along when you are not fighting and your child’s age and stage of development. It will also depend on what the issues are, how often you fight and even when you fight.

The fact that you wonder if the children will be affected might suggest that something about the way the two of you disagree has you concerned. Ask yourself how your child acts during and after a fight. For example, does he take on the role of mediator and try and persuade you to resolve things? Does he raise his voice, run away, appear anxious or upset or not talk to or listen to one of you afterward? Does he imitate you? Is he overly dependent on his siblings in a way that suggests a lack of trust in his parents?

One thing we know for sure is that children are far more aware of fighting than parents think, so be aware of what information they get from an argument. They don’t miss a thing! It is natural and normal for couples to fight as no two people agree on everything. It can even be a healthy and constructive way to resolve tension if done appropriately. Children can learn much as observers and need not feel threatened or insecure, assuming they see that you respect and love each other, you quarrel, resolve your issues and then become warm and affectionate once again to each other.

Fighting in itself doesn’t destroy either a marriage or the children’s psyches. It is how you fight that determines how your child will ultimately do. What gets said and how is it said? Are you calm, considerate, open, honest and mature or do you interrupt, bring up issues that are not relevant to the argument or verbally abuse each other? Do you include your children in your fight, forcing them to take sides or blaming them for your issues?

While you can, and maybe even should, fight in front of your children, your goal is to work through and resolve issues by being both a good role model and teaching healthy conflict resolution skills. If you argue frequently, but never seem to resolve an issue, children will see that discussion does little to solve problems. When children experience constant conflict and either don’t see issues being resolved or don’t see the fight end with parents making up, the take-away message is that fighting is bad. They may see you as competitive, mean, scary and indecisive, and they themselves may feel insecure, stressed or assume their behavior is the cause of your conflict.

As it is, children may draw the wrong conclusions and sometimes completely misunderstand what you’re arguing about, or assume by your tone that you’re arguing when in fact you aren’t. Children need lots of reassurance that all is okay.

While many issues can, and should, be brought up in front of the kids, you should always be aware of the impact they might have. You know your own child and his needs best. Many disagreements or differences of parenting styles, for example, can be easily addressed in front of the children and input from the children even discussed. However, if two parents disagree such that one parent is more permissive than the other and brings this up in front of the child, the child will soon learn to manipulate his parents and ask the more lenient one for what he wants. Private or confidential issues around intimacy, sex, work, money or other people should also not be aired in front of your children.

If you think that fighting can never take place in front of your child, be aware that by protecting your child from anger or conflict, you may inadvertently deprive him of an opportunity to perfect interpersonal skills that he’ll need later in life. I have seen many an adult in my office who, having been shielded from all parental conflict as a child, has difficulty in his current relationships because he avoids conflict at all costs. Wouldn’t it have been better for him to have learned that parents who love each other can acknowledge their differences and frustrations yet be tolerant, accepting and ultimately forgiving, and move on?

In an atmosphere of love within the family, there will be room for disagreements and differences of opinion because people can tolerate this and express themselves constructively and in a healthy way. Stay tuned until next time when I’ll address just how to argue and how to resolve quarrels and provide some rules for fighting fairly.

Source: Jerusalem Post, Israel
http://tinyurl.com/3ekota

Freshmen at the University of Washington can’t solve middle school math problems. So said 60 of their professors in an open letter released this spring. If you thought math was a problem just for those students struggling to pass the WASL and graduate from high school, it’s time to take a second look.

This is my 40th year as a math teacher. I have taught gifted students who intuitively speak the language of calculus. I have also taught those who, because of drugs or difficult home situations, cannot retain what they learn from one day to the next. But for most of my students, the attitude they and their parents bring into the classroom can make all the difference in the world.

There is little doubt that there is a huge discrepancy between the minimum high school mathematics requirement for graduation (passing the WASL or one of its alternatives) and the level of mathematical proficiency necessary to succeed in college and the careers that lie ahead for most of today’s students. As teachers and parents, we do everyone a disservice if we tell them getting by in math is good enough. If we expect more, we’ll get more.

Having taught in public schools for 25 years, I’ve seen many students thrive there. Their success is driven by their willingness and the commitment of their parents to be aggressive in their approach to education. Those students have learned to seek out teachers for help, do what they are asked to do and take the demanding classes that sometimes require them to move out of their comfort zone.

For the past 15 years, I’ve taught at an independent school where every graduate goes on to college. Here I find students with that same drive. What’s different in an independent school classroom is that small class size guarantees that I, as a teacher, have time to help each student. Because of the huge demands put on public school teachers, getting individual attention may require more effort and determination. But dedicated teachers love to help and committed parents and students will find what they need, if they look for it.

The results can be amazing. Charles Wright Academy accepts students who are average and above and half of them take Advanced Placement calculus. Yet statewide, fewer than 10 percent of students take an AP math test. We can and must do better.

Ultimately, the responsibility rests on students. Parents, please don’t be intimidated by math or treat it as a subject your child is either good at or not good at.

Ask them: Are you really doing everything you can to succeed? Have you explored every challenge and taken every opportunity to find support, guidance and help? If they haven’t, then you’re not doing your job as a parent and they’re not doing their job as students.

If you’re wondering why it matters, just ask yourself, how important is this child and her future to you and to our society?

Howard Wouters taught math for 25 years at Clover Park High School and joined the faculty of Charles Wright Academy, an independent college prep school 15 years ago. In 1999, he received the Parent Association’s Inspirational Faculty Award.

Source: Seattle Post Intelligencer
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/365786_math05.html

Children who look away when problem solving may be more likely to come up with the right answer than those who do not, research has suggested.

The findings are being used to help teachers gauge a child’s progress.

The study, which assessed children from across the Forth Valley and Glasgow, found those aged between five and eight were more likely to avert their gaze when carrying out a difficult task.

Children aged between four and six also showed similar results, although they were more likely to look at the questioner if they knew them well.

Dr Gwyneth Doherty-Sneddon, who led the study group, said: “These results are important because they show that children avert their gaze when they are trying to carry out a task which is difficult or with which they are not yet familiar.

“In our most recent work we have investigated whether gaze aversion is associated with transitional knowledge states.

“That means that gaze aversion is a useful thing for teachers, carers and parents to know about.”

Dr Doherty-Sneddon said that from a teacher’s point of view, gaze aversion was a positive sign that a child is developing their understanding.

By contrast, she said the study showed that children who are not improving or in fact regressing, tended to look away less.

The study is being used to help teachers and educational psychologists help youngsters with conditions like autism and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.

The research was funded by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC).

Source: BBC News, UK
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/tayside_and_central/7433436.stm

The math gender gap is huge in some countries and virtually nonexistent in others, suggesting that social and cultural influences trump biology when it comes to how boys and girls learn arithmetic.

Test scores for girls lagged the most in countries where gender inequities were most pervasive.

“The so-called gender gap in math skills seems to be at least partially correlated to environmental factors,” says economist and study researcher Paola Sapienza, PhD of Northwestern University’s Kellogg School of Management. “The gap doesn’t exist in countries in which men and women have access to similar resources and opportunities.”

Gender Gap: Nature vs. Nurture

The question of whether nature or nurture has the bigger impact on why boys seem to do better in math and girls in reading has been studied for decades.

The fact that there is little difference before the teenage years favors the idea that environment plays a bigger role than biology, Sapienza tells WebMD.

The new research, appearing in the May 30 issue of Science, suggests that the opposite is true.

Sapienza and colleagues analyzed the scores of 276,000 teenagers living in 40 countries who took the same standardized tests designed to measure math, reading, science, and problem-solving ability.

When all the scores were combined, boys outscored girls in math by an average of 10 points, and girls outscored boys in reading by almost 33 points.

The researchers assessed cultural views regarding the roles of women and men in each of the countries by reviewing data from established surveys of gender equity.

The surveys asked questions such as “Should women work outside the home?” and “Is it more important for a man to get a college education than a woman?”

In countries with the fewest social and cultural restrictions on women — including Iceland, Sweden, and Norway — math scores for girls were as good as boys or better.

The biggest math score gender gap occurred in Turkey, where girls’ scores lagged behind boys by 23 points. Turkey also scored among the lowest on the gender equity surveys.

The U.S. fell in the middle of the pack, with girls scoring 10 points lower on average in math than boys.

Bridging the Gender Gap

The reading advantage that has been traditionally seen among girls did not appear to be greatly influenced by culture.

In every country girls performed better than boys in reading, but the gap was widest in countries with the fewest gender inequities.

Among boys, the overall scores in math and reading were higher in the countries offering the most advantages to women and lowest in countries offering the least.

“This is important because it shows that advances for girls do not come at the expense of boys,” Sapienza says.

Yale professor of physics and astronomy C. Megan Urry, PhD, tells WebMD that it is clear that cultural influences play a big role in learning. But she adds that gender is just one piece of a complex puzzle.

Urry chairs the department of physics and directs the Yale Center for Astronomy and Astrophysics.

“People make a big deal about the gender gap in mathematics, but the fact is Japanese women are better at mah than American men,” she says.

“Over the last 30 years it has changed a lot, so it is pretty clear that this is more a function of attitudes than physiology,” Urry says.

Source: CBS News, NY
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/05/29/health/webmd/main4136315.shtml

Somewhere between the traffic report and an erectile dysfunction advertisement, John Deeks booms over your breakfast cereal: “Does your two-year-old make careless mistakes? Do they appear to not be listening to you? Does your son crawl around or climb on things? Or is your daughter easily distracted and babbles excessively?”

“If you answered, ‘Yes’ to most of these questions, your baby is suffering from a common case of ADHD and may be in need of the health benefits of Methylphenidate Hydrochloride.”

Now in handy pop-packs for little fingers, it comes in new Dora The Explorer, The Wiggles and Bob the Builder range, perfect for long car trips, shopping trolley tantrums and special occasions like birthdays and Christmas. Consult your local GP today.”

It’s a mock advertisement, of course, but there are scary parallels to reality as we learned yesterday that more than 300 children in NSW alone are using mind-altering drugs before they have even reached school-age - some while still in nappies.

Take those warning signs. They are the official behavioural patterns issued by the health department if you are concerned your child suffers from attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.

Do the following signs apply to your toddler? Having difficulty sustaining attention, not listening, not following through on instructions, getting easily distracted, fidgeting with hands or feet, won’t remain seated, runs about or climbs excessively, won’t be quiet, talks excessively, “blurts answers before questions have been completed”, difficulty taking turns and interrupting.

Really, is there any other kind of two-year-old? Or three-year-old, even four- or five-year-old? The health department list reads like a review of a Hi-5 concert. These are all babyish behaviours - they have not yet had a chance to prove they know any better.

The known side effects of these drugs are sickening when applied to a toddler. Suicidal tendencies, stomach cramps, shortness of breath, heart palpitations, delusions, lack of appetite, nausea, diarrhoea and insomnia.

Narelle King, the mother of a nine-year-old ADHD-diagnosed boy who she says has improved out of sight without medication, said: “It’s appalling. It makes me sick.”

King used the Dore program for her son Lucas, which uses exercises to stimulate the brain without drugs. She was so impressed, after seven months she became program adviser.

While she is “disgusted” by the new figures, she is far from surprised.

“I had a client with a six-month-old who had been prescribed Ritalin. You’ve got to be joking. The baby wasn’t sleeping, it was having trouble settling, and Ritalin is the answer?” she said.

“You’ve got to wonder whether the parents in these cases have exhausted all other options.”

David Hay, who specialises in ADHD at Curtin University, said the figures were too small to be of concern.

“I think the figures are not bad, actually - we’re not doing such a bad job,” Professor Hay said.

“It shows we bend over backwards in Australia to be scrupulous in giving medication to children of this age.”

Stringent the process may be, but we’re talking about a drug that causes children to grow just 2cm in three years - and that’s the older ones.

At the very least, it warrants further examination - you just don’t mess with the heads of babies.

Source: NEWS.com.au, Australia
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,23781648-5007146,00.html

In other words, less responsible than moms? I hate to stereotype, but, um, turn up the volume, I’m about to start.

I recently did a story on dads and how they are different (duh) than moms, for Canadian Family magazine. (You can find this issue on stands now at Indigo, Chapters, and the usual magazine places.) Besides the anecdotal evidence any parent can provide, studies have also found that dads are more active, rough-and-tumble and boundary-pushing than moms. (Well, maybe not the ones at our old trendy Toronto playground– the dads there seemed to be more working-some-deals, Blackberry-pushing than anything else.)

I think as far as moms go, I fall on the more laissez-faire side of things, active-play wise. If her playroom ends up looking like a hotel room that the Libertines tore through, Doherty blood smear paintings on the wall and all (in her case, paint, y’know, most of the time), I tend not to mind since I know I’ll be tossing some of the toys into the clean-and-donate pile while she’s at school and therefore making some headway through the headwaters of clutter. Also, it’s her playroom, so I figure she can play in it the way she wants as long as she realizes things don’t work that way in most homes (which she does realize.)

Nonetheless, the extent to which my parenting differs from my partner’s often amazes me. (Junk food: “She can eat as much as she wants, she knows when to stop.” Supervision: “Yeah, I was watching her but a lot can happen in a minute. I just turned away and then I heard a scream and that’s why she’s covered in blood. She fell on the stairs. But as you can see, she’s fine!”)

He’s a primary school teacher too, so I find myself often asking aloud, “So, you started the day with how many kids? And at the end of the afternoon, they’re all there? Alive? Accounted for?”

Case in point, yesterday, he decided to let the 8-year-old boys in his class ride an abandoned trike they found in the local park, down a hill, while being pelted by pine cones. “Omigod–it was so funny!” he howled, “It was like an episode of Jackass, only with small kids! They took turns riding down the hill on this toddler trike, and meanwhile all the other boys were throwing handful after handful of pine cones at whoever was on the bike. Then they’d chant, ‘Who wants to go on the Ride of Terror?’ and start all over again!”

So the first things that go through my mind are, litigation issues and also unemployment issues. “Yeah, the principal gave me a hard time about letting the kids go down the hill on magic carpets last winter,” he sighed.

Wondering why any sane teacher would let boys tear down a hill on a trike while being pelted by pine cones, I asked, “Why would any sane teacher let boys tear down the hill on a trike while being pelted by pine cones?”

“Because they were having fun, that’s why. They’d just finished practicing for the standardized testing, and they needed to burn off steam. Also, that little wussy boy whose mom came in to talk with me about how he had no friends and wasn’t adjusting well, was finally fitting in. He was one of the first kids on the trike! He tore down the hill and he loved it!”

What were the girls doing?

“They thought the trike was stupid. They were pretending to make food out of grass and sticks and were playing out some scenarios and stuff.”

Source: AOL Life & Style Canada, Canada
http://blogs.lifestyle.aol.ca/2008/05/28/are-male-teachers-like-dads/

An architect friend and I were recently discussing the various schooling options available to his kid who had completed her eighth grade and was moving to the ninth. Two more years, and she would be finishing secondary school already. How time flies!

Time was, when this friend of mine was considered the most mischievous kid in our class in grade six or thereabouts. Nary would a week pass without his parents being called to school for this or that complaint about him. Finally fed up with his antics, the principal asked that the child be moved elsewhere.

Because our families knew each other, we kept in touch somehow, even when we relocated to another city. He struggled in studies, of course, but managed to trundle through school. Later in college, I learnt that he eloped with some girl and got married, as the parents of the two frowned upon the relationship. Life was one huge rollercoaster for this guy! And after a few years, he finally settled down, set up a good architectural practice, and with time had two kids.

The kids giggle - and the mother joins in the mirth - when I recount to them how their father had once hidden a frog in the chalk-box, and how the teacher had the fright of her life when she opened the lid. All through my narration, the proud father would wear a smug smile and a nice halo around him, soaking in the wholesome praise that the family members would lavish!

Wonder therefore, if the friend had been born to parents who were, uh, from a different stock? What if the parents had not let the child grow naturally on his own accord, but had become concerned at the principal’s words, and sought medical intervention for “treating” him?

(The friend’s father actually roared with laughter when the teacher told him about the frog. Clearly, he approved! I suspect the father’s own antics of childhood must have flashed before his eyes in that moment. Some characteristics get carried forward, you know.)

So, what would have happened if the parents had been more paranoid about the child’s behavior being “different” from the rest of us lambs? What would have happened to his natural effervescence, his zest for enjoying other people’s discomfiture at their expense? What would have happened to his excitement about all things new and novel? We all enjoyed his antics - they were quite harmless; actually we looked forward to it, as they were a nice distraction from the usual drab of rote-learning that school used to be those days.

So, wonder what arc his story would have taken, had his parents been, uh, more concerned? Would he have had it in him to summon the courage to execute the romance-and-elopement-and-marriage project? Would he have settled down in life with a balanced head on the shoulders? Would he have been as successful as he is today?

Going by the recent trends in society, how the story arc would have turned out is the parents taking him to the school’s consulting physician. AND this expert labeling the kid “ADHD case”. AND prescribing him the routine medications that an ADHD patient gets prescribed. The medication becomes the MacGuffin of the plot, whose unfolding would from then on be both unpredictable and thrilling. Thrilling as in a psycho-thriller with a nail-biting climax.

His hyperactivity might have transformed into hallucinations, his cheerfulness would have yielded to nervous ticks and irritability, and his creativity would have been replaced by dizziness and depression. Innocent and defenseless, he wouldn’t have been able to rebel. The romance, elopement, the marriage and the two kids wouldn’t have happened. And I wouldn’t have been able to narrate to the family how the frog frightened the life out of the teacher, whose home was ultimately designed by the very same architect she complained against, almost 34 years ago. (At no cost, too, my friend tells me. His style of atonement, he says.)

Not an expert in this domain, my idle mulling stems from the fierce debate one gets to read in the forums and the news, raging between the two powerful lobbies of the pro- and the anti- psychotic-drug-treatment groups. The NIMH says the drugs are quite okay. This news report from BBC says no.

So as parent, who are we to believe? May be an approach which does not involve medication could be the best way to go for the time being? Let the researchers thrash out amongst themselves and decide finally who is right and who is wrong. May the best side win! But let us not be paranoid and change the child’s story arc from successful architect to one with a psycho-thriller climax.

Source: HULIQ, NC
http://www.huliq.com/60434/your-child-really-adhd

A powerful coalition of England’s leading independent schools is demanding that the Government scale back its new national curriculum for the under-fives, claiming that it violates parents’ human rights by denying them the freedom to choose how they educate their children.

The Independent Schools Council (ISC), which represents 1,280 fee-paying schools educating more than 500,000 children, has written a blistering letter to Beverley Hughes, the Children’s Minister, complaining that the new curriculum will mean that the education of under-fives is subject to greater government interference than that of any other age group.

A leaked copy of the letter, seen by The Times, says that the curriculum, known as the Early Years Foundation Stage framework, will compromise its member schools’ independence. “This clumsy intrusion into the early years’ curriculum of independent schools is both unjustified and unnecessary. More importantly, this interference conflicts with the rights of parents to privacy in their home life, which includes the freedom to choose how they educate their children and to educate them free from the control of the state,” the letter states.

The letter, copied to the Schools Secretary, Ed Balls, also complains that the framework is likely to hold back children’s progress and to lower standards. George Marsh, who is headmaster of Dulwich College Preparatory School in South London and chairman of the Independent Association of Prep Schools, said he was concerned that the framework might eventually herald greater interference in the curriculum for older children.

The framework becomes law in the autumn and will affect all 25,000 nurseries and childcare settings in England, whether they are run by the state, charities or private companies. It sets out up to 500 developmental milestones between birth and primary school and requires under-fives to be assessed on 69 writing, problem solving and numeracy skills.

The framework has come under heavy fire from a number of leading child development experts and academics, including members of the Government’s own early education advisory group.

Some argue that it relies too heavily on formal learning at the expense of free play, while others fear that its formal literacy targets will instill a sense of failure in teachers and children because they are beyond the reach of most under-fives.

There are also fears that the legislation, which requires nursery staff to make constant written observations on children to note their progress, will interfere with teachers’ ability to interact with children.

Ms Hughes has so far resisted any attempts to water down the new curriculum, arguing that standards have to be set high to ensure that children from deprived backgrounds are given the same opportunities for learning in the crucial early years as middle-class children.

She said that the 69 early learning goals were aspirations, and not targets.

The entrance of the ISC into the debate will raise the stakes considerably, not least because the independent schools have chosen parents’ human rights, not just child well-being, as their main point of attack.

Unlike the national curriculum for schools, which does not apply to independent schools, the framework will apply to all pre-school settings.

The letter, signed by Chris Parry, the ISC’s chief executive, outlines a number of other objections to the framework, which will apply to 946 of its member schools, which cater for children up to five years old.

It complains that an anomaly in the legislation will leave independent schools with stricter staffing controls than the state sector, requiring private schools to hire three or four adults for each reception class of 30, compared with one in the state sector.

Mr Parry says: “It seems ridiculous that [the framework] should dictate rules relating to staffing in the independent sector and this prescription smacks of an ideological approach.”

The ISC also complains that the requirements for teachers to produce written observations on each child will result in teachers “acting as time and motion experts hovering around children with clipboards, Post-it notes and cameras to collect ‘evidence’ ”. This will not raise standards, but will “simply distract teachers from their teaching responsibilities”.

Mr Parry says that there was inadequate consultation with ISC members over the new law, adding that the regulatory impact assessment which followed the so-called consultation was “materially misleading”.

ISC schools, the letter adds, have been given contradictory advice from local authorities as to how the framework should be implemented. Some have not been able to get any advice at all. It says that, given this lack of consultation, there should be a 12-month transition period for the implementation of the framework.

A spokesman for the Department for Children, Schools and Families, said that individual parents would have the option of applying for an exemption for their child for some or all of the learning and development requirements of the framework.

He added that the framework was flexible enough to support a wide range of approaches to education.

Source: Times Online, UK
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/education/article4004420.ece