Universal pre-school for three year olds

is the recommendation of the Early Childhood Education and Care Royal Commission. The proposal is that three year olds attend pre-school for fifteen hours a week so they can be taught the skills they need in order to go to school.

I read the newspaper article on line. It is interesting reading some articles on line because there are also some which allow readers to comment. There are also on line "polls". 

I know these things are far from scientific. They may not represent wider public opinion. The questions can be manipulated in order to obtain a particular result. They often irritate me.

It was interesting to note however that more than half of those who responded to the question of whether three year olds should be at pre-school for fifteen hours a week said "no". All the comments raised the possibility of three year old children being "indoctrinated". 

The former Prime Minister who headed the Royal Commission has suggested the proposal would "break the intergenerational cycle of welfare dependency" experienced by some children. Perhaps it would. I rather doubt it but it might. My own view is that it would take more than fifteen hours a week of pre-school to give some very young children everything they need in order to reach a standard the report obviously considers necessary. It may not be a reason not to try but are there better ways of spending the money this would take?

As a three year old I was at home with my "stay-at-home" mother most of the time. I went to "kindy" twice a week for about two hours at a time. The rest of the time I played at home or out in the street with the children of the neighbours. We were fortunate in that we lived in a small rural community. There was very little traffic. There were adults out and about on foot almost all the time. We could do those things. We could observe adults at work and even join in occasionally.  We were all learning an enormous amount about our world and how it worked, about the way things worked, about relationships. 

It isn't like that for most children now. Pre-school won't teach them those things. It is organised. Children are told what to do and when to do it. Yes, it might be "fun" to learn some "action" songs, "listen" to a (politically correct) story while "sitting still", "paint", cut and paste. You might learn some new words, to recognise your name and perhaps a few written words, the "correct" way to interact. It is all good for when you go to school. 

I watched a group of pre-school children in the memorial park yesterday. They were all involved in what I supposed was a "fun" activity. All of them were doing the same thing. It was a tightly controlled exercise designed to teach them something about the sun and shadows. I have seen them and other groups in the park on numerous occasions and there has always been the same degree of control. There has always been the intention to teach them something.

Are they having fun? Perhaps. Are they learning? Almost certainly. They are learning something someone has considered necessary.

It seems to me though that there is something they are not learning. They are not learning self-motivation. They are not learning to discover any number of things through self-initiated play. Their imagination may be stimulated but it is being stimulated in a controlled way. 

It is all very well saying children need to learn "the basics" and of course they do but progress depends not on everyone having the basics. It also depends on children having the independence, curiosity and creative mind that comes from uncontrolled play.  It might be good to simply let them loose occasionally.