Children in Wokingham, Surrey could start school as young as age three, subject to a council review into school starting age.

All the evidence says this is detrimental to the well being of the youngster but more importantly perhaps to society at large. What is this intended to achieve? It will disengage parents even more from the responsibilities and enjoyment of their children.

The Professional Teacher's Association has called for the starting age to be raised, rather than lowered, to 6 or even 7. For more information, read the following article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/6925642.stm Perhaps if early years education is very play-focused then lowering the age can work. The advantages I can see are that it would help to develop young children's interpersonal skills and cut down on childcare costs at home!

Why not send them to school straight from the maternity ward??!! I think it's ridiculous to suggest children of 3 are ready for full time education. My daughter will start school this September having just turned 4 a few days before. She will be taught together with children who will soon turn 5. A year can make quite a difference, not only in mental ability but also in size and strength. In Stockport, the borough in which I live, there is only one intake. I think there should be 2, possibly even 3 intakes in any 1 year.

In Northern Ireland we aleady have the earliest school starting age in Europe. We are in danger of providing "Too Much too soon" All of the research shows that young children need to learn through play first before moving to formal education. Think again, let them be children please!

At my son's school (he is just finishing reception age 5), the children are still having accidents and are not all fully potty trained. And yet this is a consideration for 3 year olds? Although my 3 year old would probably love the idea, we are far happier taking her to the children centre and being with her. I think we should raise the age, not lower it. And also ensure there are numerous intake rounds. We have to drive our son to school because he was not ready when the intake registrations took place (some tricky potty training and behaviour - aspartame intolerance to work through). Now we are adding to the carbon footprint and traffic woes of our area.

We all know that we are moving to children starting school at 3 why? It is well known that 5 is possibly too early anyway if we look at Europe they start later and achieve more. The early year’s pre-5 schooling has mainly been provided by the Community Sector and local authorities buying places and services from them because it is cheaper and better equipped to deliver nursery provision that Ofsted has constantly praised. So if Education budgets are under pressure now and staffing difficult to find and provide, as many schools stay open with unqualified Teaches (e.g. Greenwich has a unqualified teaches percentage of 40% others have more) how will local authorities cope? Tony Pretty Education, Community & Youth Consultant

My daughter started school when she was three and a half. I am based in Turkey and the infant class is in a village. There are 12 other pupils and Amazon is the youngest. Initially she found the day, from 8-30 to 13-30 tiring. The school provides a bed for youngsters who need to take time out for tiredness. Also she became frustrated because she lacked the motor skills of the older children, and this in turn limited her attention-span. After a year she has caught up and overtaken many of her class-mates. Her motor-skills are quite superb, she knows a number of songs and games, and importantly has several friends. I had some reservations when she started school at three, but on balance I would now recommend it, but only where there is flexibility, a community spirit, and where parents can be on-call if needed. Stephen BRAY

I have two children - one aged 5 & one aged 3. The 5 year old actually attended an international school when aged 3 and a half, in the UK he is one of the youngest in his class (born in June). His brother however will be one of the eldest (born in November) - and he's desperate to start school yet he will be effectively a year behind when his brother could start school because of the ridiculous policy that children can only enter school in September (why not twice a year?!).

In terms of reducing the school entry age I think this all depends on what they're actually going to be doing. If they'll be playing, learning to socialise & so on and supported by skilled professionals in a safe supportive environment I see nothing wrong with that. At our local school the boys begin at 8:30am and finish at 2:45pm so we have plenty of the day left together.

For me I'm more concerned about things like SATS - I'm happy for my children to attend school at an early age providing what they do there is appropriate to their age. Exams and exam culture, homework & so on isn't in my opinion appropriate for primary aged children.

I think it's rediculous children starting school at 3.

I work in a day nursery attached to a school and no way would the 3 year olds cope with school, a lot of them strugle at 5.

Children should be able to learn through play and not pushed too much too soon.

There is plenty of time for them to learn at school when they are older.

When will the government learn from other countries where they don't start school until 6 or 7. the attendance is far better and they are more willing to learn as they haven't been forced to sit and learn from so young.

Playgroups and nurseries are fine for them as they are learning through play and not a very structured day.

Come on government and don't even consider it, it will be such a bad move to make.

In my opinion 3 is far too early for children to start school. I believe society is attempting to make our children grow up far too quickly, they don`t seem to have much of a childhood these days.

I work in a children`s home & some of those challenging teenagers that live there have had no fun in their lives & take things very seriously. I think that starting school at 3 will only serve to encourage this.

My grand-daughter will be 2 next Jan but to think of her starting school at 3 is just beyond belief.

It isn't possible to design a 'curriculum' thats fun, relevant to that age and that enhances childhood?

I know of a child who was forced into school by the age of 4 - one week after her birthday. The local authority informed her parents that if she did not start school then, there would not be a place for her at the local school.

She was utterly lost for at least 12 months, not coping well with school or other aspects of her emotional life.

In spite of this extremely early start, she was hardly given the attantion she deserved. She had mild epilepsy. That was not picked up when she blanked out at school. She was merely put down as 'awkward'. Her relatives finally realised what was happening - and then ahd to struggle to gain help for her

She is a bright kid, who still cannot read well. So the extra time at school certainly did her no good. She was only given help with her reading during the last year at Junior school.

She now struggles mightily at secondary school. The lack of early help with reading skills, has left her unable to easily take in any academic subject. It has sapped her confidence and put barriers in the way of learning. There is one enormous hurdle at which she constantly balks. And that is the enjoyment of reading.

 So what did this enforced early schooling do for her? All positive answers appreciated. 

How exactly did they force her into the school? I thought 5 was the compulsory age?

Her experience sounds bad but it would look to me that what you're saying she needed was earlier good support to learn to read (whether this was via school or family) - I don't quite see how her 'enforced early schooling' equates to her struggle with reading skills now? I can see the argument for a need for a better understanding of her needs when she started school, but then I'd expect that to be the case anyway.

Sounds more like that even if she'd started that particular school at age 5 she'd have still had a bad experience.

Mike, 

It was 'their policy'. They forced her into school, because if she had not gone at the time which the local Education authority specified, she would have had to travel much further than the short walk to this particular school - hardly ideal for a small child. And that was the threat which was held over the heads of her caring parents.

Of course the school had a 'nursery class', so it wasn't really school at all was it? (ho-ho. how early the duplicity begins.)

The point is that the professionals did not pick up that this child was in trouble. Do they have no training which would let them realise that a child needs extra help and encouragement before the problem becomes intractible? When the parents picked it up, the school was, for far too long, completely disinterested which left the parents feeling that they were worrying unnecessarily.

If the child had been at home, perhaps her own mother could have helped her more. But since the 'professionals' had charge of her child during the school day, the parents assumed that the best was being done to bring that child on.. and that the only problem was with the child.

With only one child, what reference did the parents have for the problems which their daughter has?

A great deal of (often unwarranted) trust is placed in 'the professionals'.  

From my perspective, having struggled with an assortment of health, educational and social care professionals, (who acted - and are still acting - in a quite unprofessional manner) that blanket level of trust, needs to be removed, and only set back in place where the individual 'professional' is shown to act professionally - as I am aware that most do. But would it help if every parent were given free reign to wander through the school when lessons are taking place, so they could personally see that their child is being properly educated and treated well? Hardly!

So what is the answer? Pushing children into school even earlier?

Does no-one realise how precious our children are? There must be a better way to take them out into the big world. And that way must not only suit some professional's idea of perfection but must be of benefit to that individual child.