Unfair to defer summer borns

I can't think of anything worse for a small child confidence than being singled out and put in the "short children" section either 😅
And what about the average sized children, do they go in the large children or small children section? Or can they have the privilege of both tall and short friends because of their averageness 😂

I am end of July and wasn’t deferred. I was actually top of my class all through infants and primary. Proof some of us younger ones can actually be quite smart and ready for learning, even at a young age!

My point is that as you say, the August child can easily defer. It's not difficult to do that.

Trying so hard to prevent your child being born on 31st August instead of 1st September is mad.

Lots of misinformation on this thread- it is a national policy that parents of summer born children can apply for their child to go into RECEPTION one year later. So age 5 rather than 4.

I wish we could have defered DD. She is adopted and had FASD but as she is an october baby the nurseries wouldn't keep her on and we couldn't afford for one of us to give up work.
She is still working years below and would have really benefitted.

I think the window should be narrowed to July/August borns only, and even then it should be when there are additional needs. I don’t mean diagnosed conditions, as a lot of conditions that may impact development are not identified or diagnosed at that age. It should only be permitted where there is evidence that the child meets a sensible criteria of genuinely not being ready to start school.

You should have deferred her OP. No way would I send a just turned 4 year old to full-time school. Compulsory school age is 5 for a reason. You know that she will have to sit all day at a desk at just turned 6.
Don't interfere in other patents decisions to give their child more time to play and not start school until they are 5.

If the child was born in August they joined kids older than them unless they officially deferred.

The September birth meant they were the oldest in the year and not the youngest

I kind of know what you mean, my older one is August born, youngest in the year and if she’d been a week late she would be in year 1 instead of 2. Unlike OPs child she is struggling a little bit socially and is emotionally immature. She’s doing very very well academically in one area and very behind in another (teacher suspects mild sen). I am sick of the competitive parenting, and have a lot of guilt over not deferring because I wonder if she might have been better off (breaks my heart to hear her say she’s stupid). I’m at home with her sibling anyway and could have managed but somehow it didn’t feel right. I wouldn’t judge a parent whose child is behind deferring, but “just because” must be quite hard on teachers who are trying to manage a varied group as it is :(

And me in the 1970s. My mum said I wasn’t going until I had to (after turning 5 - I am summer born), and that was that.

No they don't go into year one they apply to go into reception. Parent of a July born child for whom deferral was the right decision.

Thank you for your detailed response. I think you’re right in saying things need to change, clearly it’s not been thought through and with the number of deferred pupils increasing it’s likely to become more of an issue.

Agree with league table sentiment.

This is the Scottish system. Runs March to Feb and school starts in August so youngest are approaching 4.5 when they start

Are you in the UK? I didn’t know this was a thing. I thought children had to go to school when they were a certain age whatever.

Oh great - no need for children to be deferred then!

Agree
Thats what my friends said

I think what should have happened is that children need to be 4 1/2 at a minimum to start school on 1st September, and worked the birthdays backwards to get them to that point. That would have solved so many problems. Yes, there will always be a youngest, but the 'youngest' needs to be 'older' and more school ready.

I teach in a mixed age class.
I teach nursery and reception. We have children aged 3 starting now with children just coming up to 6 in September. It works great and all of the children in my reception will meet their ELG this year (and do most years unless SEND is a barrier)

That's utterly bonkers.

Especially when you can still start them at school in the same year anyway regardless of whether they are born in August or September.

YANBU

I’m summer born (August) and so is one of my DC

It was never a thing when I was at infant school in the 80s

There’s an August born boy in DC’s class and so he’s practically a year older than her

I don’t really ‘get’ this holding back- unless there are specific issues- it just seems pointless

Anyhow you need to speak to the teacher regarding your child being hurt by another

DD is 19th August, and is the youngest in her class by quite a chunk. She's not academic, and is emotionally immature as well. Deferral was discussed, but ultimately the school and I felt it best for her to move up with her peers for a variety of reasons. She's now in year 2, struggling badly and I bitterly regret the decision not to defer. She's on the assessment pathway for autism and PDA, it would have given her an extra year to progress academically and emotionally. The gap between DD and her peers is getting bigger, and she's noticing which is causing frustration and more emotional outbursts. It's horrible.

I can understand why people choose to defer, but then I can also see the pitfalls that you highlight in your OP. It's not a decision to be taken lightly, nor is it an easy one to make without a crystal ball!

Behind her peers? Children are not compared to other children. There are standards/expectations to meet set by the National Curriculum.

More able (often older children) bring a lot of benefits to a class.

I am July born and never struggled academically at school or university. I think you assess you child on how well you think they'll do going into the correct year group. I was the youngest in a large family so lots of older siblings prepared me for bigger kids and I was reading before I started school so it was right for me.

The twins in my DCs class are most definitely not behind…

As I said upthread, GCSE stats for core subjects are based on the number of Y11 age students in the school, so a child who had deferred into a lower year would count as ungraded (a fail). Sometimes when it does happen schools put the student with their ‘correct’ cohort for those subjects which is a sort of solution but problematic for maths due to the way skills build on each other - it can result in the student getting a lower grade than they otherwise would have. This sometimes has a knock on as even if they resit and get a better grade some universities and courses want GCSE grades from first attempt.
If the school doesn’t try to enter the student with their ’correct’ cohort their results don’t count anyway as they aren’t a GCSE eligible age again.
If it’s going to become commonplace then the rules about league table stats will need to change. I’d ban league tables personally, but I don’t see it happening. I’m not sure what right of push back a school would have if they didn’t want to take deferred students, but an oversubscribed school could probably find grounds if they really wanted to.