To be shocked deferring by a year has become this common?

Around here they start in reception if deferred and stay with that cohort throughout primary and secondary.

We are on the border of 5 counties so kids go to school in any of these areas and they are all the same.

Yes once I heard this I didn't feel so bad about my choice to stick with her "correct" year

This is what I thought happened but I take it deferred kids now start in reception?

This is vastly overestimating the effect on an individual level - there's clear cohort evidence, but that doesn't mean that it can predict how an individual child will do. Nor is age the strongest predictive factor, by some way: parental income and education is much more so. Realistically a middle-class summer-born from a family that values education comes in with a significant advantage over a child who is 11 months older but doesn't have those other advantages - but actually, none of that is enough to tell you who will do best academically out of any two actual children, rather than an average cohort of them. Data isn't destiny.

In the normal run of things they are the same age as some others (there were 4 August birthdays in my sons class) and then there are the July, June, May babies that aren't that different. The September one could easily say they were 11 months older than some of thier peers and it was boring.

The deferred entry thing is meaning less summer borns in each class and making it worse for those that stay. Then the new struggling group will be April, may, June or match, April, May.

If they just made the first few years of school more play based it wouldn't be such an issue.

And many of the selective schools have overcome this by standardising entrance exam results by age.

DD1 is a June baby and the only option for us would have been to skip reception at age 4 and send her straight into Y1 at 5, which seemed worse. I don’t know of anyone round here who deferred their summer born.

DD1 went to nursery for 3 full days since the age of 1 and has never struggled with school, so I think it very much depends on the child and is certainly not a given that they will be disadvantaged.

We considered it until we discovered it affects senior school (round here they put them back in their "correct" year so they either miss year 6 or year 7 depending when you make the move) and the head teachers need to sign it off. It's hard and you have to do what is right by your child but it shouldn't be the norm.

There are always threads on this, and it's mostly responses from parents saying their summer-born was fine starting at just turned four, and then others saying they are glad they deferred.

You don't know how your child would be. There are potential advantages and disadvantages for both options - yes, starting school later may be better for a young four year old, but they might struggle when their 'normal' cohort are off to university/going out to work and they have a whole extra year of school to finish.

People will make different choices, you will do what's best for your child. I don't think it's as 'life-changing' as some like to make out - everyone knows summer-borns who have done well and September borns who have done less well in school. There are many factors to consider for children in schools. Just focus on supporting your child as much as you can.

Where I live in wales I don’t know anyone who has deferred their summer born. Our kids start school at 3 and are in for 2.5 hours a day. My son is August born and at first you could definitely tell. He was not as physically, socially or academically advanced as his peers. However he’s in year 8 now and doing brilliantly. He’d be fuming with me if he was in the year below because it wouldn’t have helped him in any way and he’d be doing an extra year of school (or so it would feel to him). Also, he wouldn’t have been allowed to play football with the year below and football is his huge hobby that he plays with many school friends.

My daughter is September born. She was more ready to start school aged almost 4 instead of just 3 like my son. However, she’s in year 5 now and no more academically, physically or socially able than he was by this age. If anything, she’s a bit behind in her maths. I think the only reason I would choose to defer a summer born child would be if they were born prem and were due to be in the year below or they had additional needs and would be better suited to an extra year before school. It helps living in wales because our curriculum is play based for longer than England so no whole class formal learning in year 1

While I take your point, I also think it's a bit odd the way people focus on the gap with the oldest - it makes it sound like all the others will be nearly 5 with just this one poor just turned 4 year old. DS1 is 13 months younger than the oldest child in his class (because her deferring stretched the gap further!) but half the class is within a few months of him. If you compare the oldest and youngest the difference is obvious, but in the general throng it is so much less so - he's the second-youngest, but he isn't the second-smallest, the second-shyest or the second-least academic, those are all children who are older than him.

Eastern Europe is compelety different system. Yes, they do start at 6-7, but think of it as going straight into Y3, no Reception. Also they finish later, think equivalent of A-levels.

None of the personal “my august born child did find” stories really matter when the educational and psychological research papers overwhelmingly say otherwise.
sex and birth order also makes a difference.

I was “accelerated “ back in my time and in my country and following my experience I started reading on deferrals before my July born was even born!

He turned out speech delayed and on the SEN register so I had a case, but would have pushed it regardless.

His class is full of non-deferred summer borns, but they are mostly girls for which on average the impact is waaaay lower given their faster development rate. One of my DS’s closest friends is a girl 1y 1m younger than him, she looks like his mum 😂😂

If you defer school entry here, your child then misses Reception and goes straight into Y1, which I thought was even worse, so my child had just stopped being 3 when he started.

Dd not dad 😂

My dad started at 4.5yr, her friend started at 5yr 7months. The youngest in her class was 4yr 2months when starting and the oldest was 5yr 7months. Nearly a year and a half age difference. They are all great friends.

Not sure what data.

Does "Google" ring any bells?

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7b29e5ed915d3ed9062971/DFE-RR017.pdf

Sure, it has data, but it's a virtual obsession among middle-class English people. I mean, the data crosses cultures, but the competitive, insecure, socially aspirant type of attitude to parenting and education you get among the MC in England catastrophises it. Someone will always be the youngest in a year group.

That wasn't our experience of either reception or year 1.

I would definitely have deferred at that age, but I live in Scotland.
My DD has an October birthday and in England she'd be one of the oldest. As it is, so many deferred there are only two younger than her in her class- even though the cut off is officially Feb!

To be honest in Scotland I think it's gone a bit far - there's a boy in my DDs class who is 14 months older than her, and he's nearly 18 months older than her January born friend. He smashes all of them at all the sports things. But that's another story. I think just turned 4 is too early for formal school, but nearly 5 is generally fine to start.

I didn't say that the UK has play-based learning. The countries where they start school aged 3 do.

People say this a lot but it's quite misleading - in a lot of countries all children are in some sort of childcare by age 4 and what they do might not be called school but it is otherwise very like what our children do in reception.

In Ireland when I was in school (80s), it was age 4, in the last few years they say age 5 and give precedence to people closer aged 6! Tbh both my sons were 4 and a half and both teachers said there was a world of difference between age 4 and 5, one said the older ones were easier in every way.

The school and the LA make it very clear deferment is only for exceptional circumstances such as additional needs or prematurity that meant if they were not premature they would have gone into the year below.

That's an illegal policy.