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

If you compare a summer born baby (say august) that child will be just 4 when he starts school. A September born baby is 5 when he starts school. If the august baby is deferred, he starts school at 5, same as the September baby.
How is a deferred child a year older when the finish school?
The inverse is true, a summer born baby that is not deferred, finishes school a year earlier !

I think it’s great that the option is now there. My DH was an August baby and from things that have been said about his schooling I suspect he would have achieved more academically if he had been able to start a year later.

My own dc are home ed but if they had gone to school I wouldn’t have sent them until they were CSA which is the term after they turn 5.

Absolutely standard here, I don't know any summer-born children who DIDN'T defer.

Repeating years is pretty common here too, but there's no real stigma attached any more - it's considered part of moving at the pace of the child.

But finding learning hard is also a really good reason to defer / be held back, regardless of age. It gives the children a much better chance.
I remember growing up that the oldest children in the class were rarely if ever the most mature. Conversely, the youngest children fit in just fine and even when they didn't quite, it was better than the alternative of them being bored stiff in the lower grade - where they definitely wouldn't have fit in at all.

.

I think it's silly, I would have done the same as you unless there were exceptional circumstances.
I just think deferred children are held back a whole year and that's an awfully long time when they get to secondary school age. They either have to skip a year at some point which must be stressful or they're finishing school a whole year later?!
I think what's actually needed is more flexibility in reception and year 1 to do age and ability appropriate work.
I say this as a July baby who went to school when deferring wasn't a thing. Also one of my DDs is April born and she was so ready for school, if she had been due to start when the had just turned 4 I wouldn't even have considered deferring for her

If you're worried is it possible to take him out and start again next year?
I know it very much depends on the home/work situation and availability of preschool options etc. However I do know people who have done this following discussion with the teacher. Their child was just not emotionally mature enough even though academically able. No SN or anything, just too young for the class at that time. This wasn't in the UK though.

We're in a country where deferring is pretty common and always has been. Dd would have been literally the youngest in her year (born on the cut-off date). We deferred her - she was absolutely ready cognitively/academically, but very small physically (was still the smallest in her class when she started a year later as one of the older ones) and not high in confidence. It's worked out fine - and in fact the cut-off date was moved forward by three months the year after she started. She's not the oldest in her class by any means either.

I think people's ideas are starting to catch up to research. We know that the earlier the kids start school, the worse the outcomes tend to be. We know that they should prioritise play. Scandinavian countries have moved school start to the year they turn 7. Countries like South Africa, Russia, some Asian countries this has always been the case.
People used to say ' ohh but she is so bright!" ( such a pet-peeve of mine.. anyway) But parents are beginning to realise that it has nothing to do with intelligence. They are starting to think of the social and emotional side of a 4 year olds development. Realising that their kid would have been deprived of a full year's play( and thus development) when compared to a baby born in September/October.
It is honestly mind-boggling to me that the UK still lets 4 year old's start school. We are trying but the policies are nit changing. Hopefully when enough parents are educated on child development, the pressure will come from the parents.

Russian schools teach very differently to our schools (or at least they did when I spent time in Russia around 15yrs ago). They were strict, rigid, lots of learning by rote etc. I completely see how that is in line with repeating years.

I'm an August baby and when I started primary 30 odd years ago, you could start in either Sept, Jan or April. I started in the January. I'm sure that was a nightmare for teachers, but it feels better for kids. DD1 is an end of June baby and I don't think deferring her a whole year would be beneficial, but she ideally probably needs an extra couple of months in nursery. A Jan start would be perfect for her. As it is, I think we will be sending her at 4yrs 2months.

Compulsory school age isn't until 5 and there's no chance I'd send mine before that. But everyone is different, other countries who start much later seem to get great results, I don't see any benefit apart from nursery fees to a 4 year old attending school

The fault lies with the postcode lottery system in the UK where some councils are fine with it and others aren’t. Therefore, it is a smallprint reading issue. In other countries, it’s a normal choice all parents are aware of. That should be the case here, so it isn’t a perceived middle class luxury. I am sure your child will be fine OP - thousands of August borns are but the fact that some parents choose this because they can is not (to me) shocking.

In my family (in Scotland) we had a March born girl and a Feb born boy. 5.5 and 4.5 when starting, both ready at that point but by time first important exams rolled round in secondary, due to way local areas did things there was an almost 2 year difference in the ages they sat them. And that was a v bright girl and an average boy.

All that to say, 4 is too young to be starting school!

There are some children whose ability and maturity mean that they are ready for school, even when they are summer born. There are some who really aren’t ready too, but equally, some older children find reception difficult.

If you want children to repeat a year, you would presumably have to determine whether their progress, or lack of it, was due to immaturity or to finding learning in general more difficult.

Nursery was £800 per month for me even with 30 free hours and tax free account. My child isn't summer born but if she was, another year of those fees would have been out of the question.

Not saying it is always the case, but often deferring is like having a SAHP or being able to home educate: it's a privilege not everyone can afford.

I am from Ireland, 5 years of age is typical. 4 is no longer encouraged.

They are in education now up to typically 22 years of age, four year degree or apprenticeships. why wouldn't you want them a year older?

Research shows longer engagement and higher success rates are linked to older age commencement.

My Russian friend was telling me how it’s very common to keep kids back a year, force them to repeat if they grades are not good. No matter the age of the kid.

Where I live you can’t defer. You can miss reception but then the child starts at year 1 which cause problems. There was one child that did this. In one of my DCs class there were 3 DC born in the last week of Aug.

edited to add - they are all doing well and now in secondary.

Yes in our county they just stay with their new year group throughout.

He wasn´t behind, he was bang on target. He is the age he is...

Missing the point a little but how does deferring work with secondary school? Does this mean all the July / August kids will be starting secondary school a year later too?

I don't really understand not deferring to be honest. Surely it's an unnecessary buzz kill when they get to year one and suddenly can't learn through play any more. Why not give your August baby another year of fun first? That's without all the population level stats on outcomes.

I think it’s a good thing more parents are choosing to defer, if that’s what is right for their child. My DT’s would no way have been ready to start school at just turned 4, they’re old for their year so were almost 5 when they started which was much better for them. I would have deferred if they were summer born.

Why is that? Interested to hear other people's negatives about not delaying.

I didn't with my very late August daughter but then I was late August too and I feel I was fine. Daughter probably does struggle academically at times but in Y3 was about average for where she should be. I am a bit concerned about Y4 though :/