Unfair to defer summer borns

I think this is possibly what makes the difference. I live in a high deferrals area in Scotland and when it was coming up to school application time was invited along for a nice chat with the school nursery who explained my options.

They don’t recommend you stay in nursery an extra year but are very supportive of parents if you’d like to choose that option. As school is quite a while away( this is in January) it’s recommended you apply both for a deferred place at the nursery and for a school slot and make your decision in June as children can change so quickly.

Once you’ve made that decision you will have to stick with it so children will be with your chosen year group throughout primary and secondary. Absolutely no skipping a year in Secondary.

I didn't have to look far to find a thread regarding parents having to make additional payments to cover the additional costs of the government 'free funding'.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/5331002-to-think-this-happens-everywhere-nurseries-forcing-parents-to-pay-towards-gov-free-spaces

Is your child now in a fee paying school and that's why the costs are the same?

Fairness is about providing equal opportunity. That does not mean an equal outcome for everyone. If the schools offers that opportunity fairly, I don’t see why it is an issue. In reality, some children will be exceptionally high performers and some will be exceptionally low performers and all the others are somewhere in between. Intelligence, looks, charm, sportiness, musicality, creativity aren’t dished out in fair portions.

I live in a country where deferral is common and there is a grammar type system. The problem is it has become common for parents to game the system, making classes much older. On top of this SEN kids may be down a year or two. So old classes, which the younger children struggle badly in.

A friend put their child up a year. They are fine in the main language and maths, but struggling in the other subjects and PE, with a real confidence knock.

Working with preschoolers it is clear
which ones really wouldn’t be ready for school if born end of July/August. However the majority are usually doing fine and schools know some will only just be 4 when they start. Reception is still part
of the Early Years EYFS.

In my own case my daughter was August born. She went to school in the right cohort. The main issues I found were she was still very tired in reception and it was obvious who was older and that she was younger but the the vast
majority of school you wouldn’t have known. I also found she wasn’t quite mature enough to
study properly for GCSEs but had much more focus for college exams. She also hated being the youngest when all her friends started driving but she was still too young to start.

You haven’t seen the research (despite being a teacher so arguably someone capable of reading it and who should take an interest)

Instead you have relied on anecdotes from colleagues (I would be keen to see the research they refer to as I’ve never come across anything suggesting evidence of long term detriment to those who started at csa).

Yet you feel comfortable to express opinion on whether reform of the policy is required and what the policy should be.

How would you feel if your students approached critical thinking in the same way? Not many future lawyers or doctors or journalists or (good) teachers coming out of your school if so…. Maybe you also live in humble town 😂

That’s fine but then you can’t critise others for doing the same. Currently autumn born children get an advantage. There is a wealth of evidence to back this up.

A ten year old could not be in the class because that is not the rule.
I have one summer born who was ready for school and started in the right cohort. Still struggled a little socially but I have no regrets, it was the right decision. I have another who is absolutely not ready to start school at literally just turned four. He needs his full entitlement of the early year’s curriculum, which he would have automatically got is he had been born a couple of days later.

People have for years tried to make sure they have an autumn born children, I know so many teachers who have planned this. People will always try to ensure their child have the best start .

There are two separate issues:

1 - Older children have a proven educational advantage. The youngest in the year (whether that is summer or May) will always be at a disadvantage. This is unavoidable, and widening the gap between the oldest and the youngest makes this inequality worse, not better.

That is true, and is why it is unfair to defer.

However:

2 - the UK is an outlier in global terms. We start kids in "formal" education far to young. Most countries have a more split program of "kindergarten"/Pre-school, from 3-6/7, and then "school", this allows for a much better separation and transition between no school and school. Parents don't care about their child being slightly behind for the 2-3 years of pre-school because there is an extended period of "getting ready" where there are no exams, no tests, no comparisons etc. After 2-3 years of pre-school/kindergarten, many of the disadvantages of being younger are gone (not all) and every child is "ready" to start school.

So given the poor system in the UK that expects children who have just turned 4 to suddenly be as ready for school as children who are 1 day off 5, is it wrong for parents to want to avoid this disadvantage for their children? Of course not. Parents naturally want the best outcomes for their children. You can't fight that, or try and make parents not prioritize their own children.

So yes, it isn't fair.
But yes, the current system is also unfair.

Of course parents will choose the unfair system that suits their child, rather than the unfair system that disadvantages their child.

It would be lovely if the UK would consider a better, slower transition into school...

You don't get to dictate what people do and don't campaign for? If the deferral system is so fair then it can stand up to a bit of debate and scrutiny.

Deferral doesn't give the summer born children 'some chance' to catch up. It simply shifts the advantage to the deferred summer borns and increases the disadvantages of the non deferred summer borns and next youngest.

‘Humble town’, where no one would consider what is best for their child sounds delightful.

By your definition I’ll proudly be pretentious if that is your description of someone who reads about child development and different education systems, is aware of the guidelines in our own system and works hard to advocate for my child and what is best for them (and by extension their peers and school).

Happily pretentious by your definition. Humble town sounds like people more worried about what everyone else thinks of them then they are their own kids.

It matters because having an older child in the mix would change class dynamics socially. They are more mature and tend to accelerate the maturing of the group.This can be really difficult for the younger children in the year. Older children will also tend to be more advanced academically and this will increase the range of abilities that the teacher has to cater to. Not all teachers and schools are equally good at doing this and ultimately this can detriment the class if they are having to meet the needs of a child that is too old for the class.

Sports Days and other competitions will be very hard to run fairly. A 10 year old would win everything unless you intervened but how could a teacher intervene to make it fair for everyone? If you are in an 11 plus area then children are often literally in competition with each other for places in grammar school and the older children will have an enormous advantage over non deferred summer borns.

I absolutely will never be told to focus on my own child and carry on when the system needs to change. Sorry, but that it is a terrible attitude to advocate and one that I absolutely won't adopt just because you don't want the advantage that is effectively being given to deferred children to be scrutinised.

That's brilliant for your child.
My son is august born, he was born 4 weeks early. If he was born closer/ due date then he would of naturally started school 2025.

I must admit it never crossed my mind to defer my 2 "summer" born kids.

My eldest is mid August and was prem, always (and still is) on the dinky side but developmentally and socially good so wasn't on my radar to.

My youngest is May and likely autistic but no development concerns. The nursery wasn't the right setting for him so deferring him would have done more harm than good.

I'm April and it blows my mind I am considered summer born 🤣

I the the issue is that some at the end of August end up starting school af 4 years and 2 days. A lot of people feel this is way too young. This could be “fixed” by simply making it those who turn 4 before January or March rather than September, meaning the youngest you would ever be staring school would be 4 years 5 months. You’d still start school in September, but the cutoff is later so you don’t start as young.

Our youngest is an August baby. He’s almost 3. he’s reading already, but has other autism signs. We don’t know yet if he will be better in his year or deferring, and only time will tell. We will likely let the school/specialists decide at the time. Parents choosing it without awareness of their child’s abilities and before birth is just nuts.

I think one of the major reasons for deferal is that schools are asking kids to do things that many aren't developmentally ready for. If we don't want to see parents making the choice to defer kids than the class work needs to be appropriate to the range of kids in the class, which can vary a lot at that age.

Children start school very young in the UK compared to most countries. Personally I think they should be at least 5. DTs started at 5 & 2 mths & DS at 5 & 9 mths ( he was deferred). We’re in Scotland, couldn't Imagine sending a bately 4 year old yo school!

In case I wasn’t clear, deferring for a year carried no additional cost.

It didn’t cost anything extra compared to a year at school. Any child got the exact same hours as the hours offered to reception children, 9am to 3.30pm. We didn’t pay any nursery costs at all. We had to cover school holidays etc but nothing we wouldn’t have had to cover for a child attending reception.

I'm a tiny bit older than you, also summer born, but at least we started in the term following our 5th birthday. We also hadn't been put into full time nurseries since a very young age.

Are you campaigning for that? Then if not shut up. It's not gaming to give a summer born at least some chance to catch up with the well documented advantage of autumn borns.

The average life long impact to summer borns has been known now for well over 20 years. All came about in the uk when it was decided that YR for pre - compulsory school age would be the norm. Ie children starting school,not nursery, at age 4. It was a distortion of the very fake Sir Jim Rose review, where his evidence (which wasn't allowed to be shared with the general public - i asked to see it and wasn't allowed to), contradicted with his conclusions, and then the recommendations. None of this is about gaming advantage, unless of course you are the usual lovely parent of an autumn born who funnily enough seems unable to see the advantage their child has automatically.

haven't heard any bonbon the grapevine since I left 3 years ago

Haven't heard anything...

This new voice software is shit.

Bonbon the grapevine sounds like a bloody dodgy dancer 😂

Why would it matter? My child won't be held to the standards of a 10-year-old, they'll be held to the standards of a reception class curriculum - that doesn't change, regardless of how many 'older' children are in the cohort.

There's no leader board, the objectives of the class are not tailored to what the most able child can achieve and everyone else must fall in line so I don't know what this mythical 'advantage' is.

I really don't know why people get so upset about it. Focus on your own child and carry on.

I've done the school census for years and know the drivers for school funding. Age isn't one of them unless technicality for Y13. No teachers in the English system ever get close to understanding data or funding. They don't need to because qualified people like me do. I do hope you haven't been putting off parents of summer borns for this reason.