When we talk about school starting ages, it’s important that we begin by defining our terms.

Is “school” a building? In which case, the growth of school-based nursery provision means that increasing numbers of children are already starting “school” from nine months.

Or is “school” a phase of the curriculum defined by key stage 1? This one is tricky, given how many parents and school governors think “school” starts in Reception, while the government defines the start as the point when children have already been attending for a year, achieving (or not) a “good level of development”.

Or perhaps “school” is an academic approach to learning, sometimes considered by certain parts of the early years sector as objectionable on principle, with “school readiness” defined as the inappropriate application to toddlers of a pedagogy suited to older children (“school”, by definition, meaning desk-bound rote - rather than play-based - learning for toddlers).

All learning is good learning

Complicated, isn’t it? And our understanding is evolving around all aspects of when and why learning matters. The word “school” originates from scholē, originally meaning “leisure”, because in Ancient Greece education was something you did in your leisure time, not work.

At Kindred Squared, we’re not hung up on the age that a child starts “school” because we focus instead on the fact that we’re learners from birth. When you start school matters less than what you’re doing there, who’s teaching you and how much fun you’re having.

We believe in increasing the public understanding that early child development matters more than just in terms of later life chances - it’s about the wider success of us all as individuals, an economy and society. That core thinking doesn’t seem to be currently understood beyond the realms of the early years sector.

As long as our learning is age-appropriate and evidence-based, be that nursery provision, in a school building, reading and writing in a classroom or even the life lessons in communication developed through the very earliest “serve and return” interactions with our parents, then all learning is good, whatever the age.

The role of parents

We can manufacture a good old row about school starting age, but the truth is that there’s massive agreement about what works and why it matters.

There’s widespread agreement that parents are children’s first educators and that their role from birth is utterly critical to their children’s futures. Loving attachments, serve-and-return interaction (think Wimbledon!), chattiness, strong family and caring relationships shape our view of relationships and interactions with the world beyond.

Gentle but firm boundaries make us feel safe; strong, healthy routines help us to thrive.

None of this is in dispute, but we’re just not yet in a society that grasps the importance of these things to the point where our resources - time, money and attention - are sufficiently focused on giving every child the best possible opportunity in the earliest years, when it matters most.

Amplifying the science

Rather than picking at the interpretations that can divide us, we at Kindred Squared take the approach that working together to amplify the science that we agree on is a better way to serve children’s needs.

Imagine a society in which it was accepted by all that the fastest rate of brain growth and the greatest impact on life chances happen before children turn 2. Imagine if it was well known that our brains double in size in our first year, with most development occurring before we can even talk. The scaffolding for academic, emotional and relationship success is built even before the age of 3.

How might parenting change if we all knew that a child’s development score at 22 months can accurately predict educational outcomes at 26 years?

Toilet training

With obvious exemptions for SEND and medical reasons, how many of the one in four children currently reported by teachers to be starting school not toilet trained would still be struggling if all parents took on board the science of good bowel and bladder development?

That evidence shows that children should be out of nappies between 18-30 months and that 83 per cent of 18-month-olds were out of nappies in the 1970s and 1980s - but something’s gone wrong since.

How would parents feel if they knew that a third of children reportedly starting school unable to feed or dress themselves (again with medical and SEND caveats) is costing their child, and every child, an average of 2.5 hours a day of teachers’ time, with this having to be spent on catch-up activities and nappy changing?

Might we all pay as much attention to early childhood development as we do to GCSE and A-level results if we understood that, as taxpayers, for every £1 invested in the early years, the Exchequer saves £13 in later-life state interventions?

Immense savings, better outcomes

Addressing foundational developmental needs, particularly communication skills (given that 65 per cent of criminal offenders have language difficulties), could yield immense savings and better outcomes.

I would argue that most teachers would agree that it is what happens before school that matters most.

Perhaps if we focused on this rather than on arguments about “school”, we might better tackle the inequality and attainment gaps that get baked in at the start of school, whenever that may be.

Felicity Gillespie is the director of Kindred Squared, a leading early years charity

You can now get the UK’s most-trusted source of education news in a mobile app. Get Tes magazine on iOS and on Android