As another school year rolls around we all start to think about education. The topic features in both parties' manifestos. It is widely accepted as an issue critical to our nation's development. As we look to our schools with three- and four-year-olds dressed in their neatly pressed uniforms, getting a head start in a structured and well-disciplined environment, learning penmanship and letters, we see hope for the future. Yet, while the term 'early childhood education' is bandied around as the solution to our academic weakness, research suggests it might just be the source of our problems.

An article in the Daily Telegraph by child develop-ment expert Elizabeth Harltey Brewer puts a powerful argument against formal education for children under the age of seven. "American research recently found that children who had teacher-led academic lessons at the age of five did not display lasting academic advantage over those who began later. Moreover, they were more likely to display emotional problems as adults." Very young brains are programmed to learn differently, to connect up and learn through play, exploration and the close, warm attention they receive from adults.

Start of compulsory education

In Sweden, compulsory education begins at seven and can be postponed until eight. In the United States, it begins at six, but usually begins with a kindergarten year at five; France, Germany, Japan, and Spain all begin at six as do 15 other countries in Europe. By comparison, Jamaica's formal education generally begins at three or four.

While it may well not be feasible for parents to keep children home and keep them stimulated, the article does suggest high-quality pre-school systems. In France, nursery is state-funded from the age of three. The article, in particular, warns against long-standing damage to boys in particular from too early a start in the formal system, but places the emphasis in learning through play and positive reinforcement as critical to the emotional and academic development of a child.

Developing vocabulary

Another extract from Could Do it Better by Phil Beadle is based on the premise that the way a parent speaks to a child, and the words used, determine his development.

"The actual number of words parents speak to their children is vital to the development of their vocabulary. Research shows that parents in professional jobs speak, on average, 1,500 more words an hour than those on "income support". The article states that as a result, the vocabulary of the three-year-old from a middle-class family will have the same vocabulary as an adult in a "welfare family". In addition, the middle-class parent will utter nine words of encouragement to every word of censure, while the child from the 'welfare family' will receive twice as many negatives as positives. This obviously has adverse affects on the child's esteem as well as his language acquisition.

Surely, there is some relevance to our Jamaican situation, and just as the British papers are filled with tools for their readers, we too must work to educate parents and early childhood caregivers on the need for communication, positive reinforcement and learning through play. The article gives an example of a game that prompts children to make connections between things that might otherwise appear disparate, and to express these connections in language.I tested it out on my five-year-old.

"What's the odd one out of a house, an office building and a truck?" I asked. He replied confidently, the truck, because it is the only one that could move, then he added, "unless you put the building on the truck and moved it." He paused and then, "It's a really big truck!"