Unfair to defer summer borns

Incorrect. Children do not have to join their ‘actual’ cohort and can stay in their adopted cohort for the whole of their school career.

Unless there are good reasons, there is literally no point in deferring. My DS is end August birthday, they always catch up. He's doing GCSEs now and thriving.

I don't think it is at all unfair. Like the other summer borns, you had the option to defer but you exercised your right not to do so. Everyone is different. FWIW, many countries, for example Germany, they start primary school at around the age of 6. It works for them. Also in Germany, they have "sitzenbleiben" which means repeating the year if you don't do well enough. So you can have 17-year-olds in a class of mainly 15-year-olds, for example.

I was deferred in the 80s so it's always been an option.

I don’t believe 4yos should be in school at all, except maybe for the last few weeks of being 4 if they are young for the year level. So I’d have deferred my summer born (june) if I could as they are too young for school. Instead I moved them back to Australia and started them at school at 5.5 which felt just right. I could start my youngest at 4 turning 5 two weeks after school starts, but I’m leaning to 5 turning 6.

It would be detrimental to miss reception year so would cause issues for deferred children going straight to year 1. There’s such a huge difference and it would cause some children to struggle more. I hadn’t realised just how different year 1 was till the school told me in no uncertain terms my ds wouldn’t manage year 1 and the gap between him and his peers would grow so quickly

We tried to defer our child but LA refused. In our case this has been hugely detrimental and being able to defer would have given them the year they needed , instead the started at wrong time and struggled throughout.

I'd also assumed this would be the case. I.e. you don't have to put your summer-born into reception if you don't feel they are developmentally ready but when they do start school, they join their actual age cohort. That's how it worked at my DC's primary school i.e. there was an august-born child who joined half way through reception.

I know what you mean, I’m July born and was not deferred because it wasn’t a thing in the 80s, never struggled in fact hot among the top exam results in my year. I would have been so bored if kept back and children being bored can have negative consequences. I think I would have also been annoyed with my parents for holding me back by the time I got to secondary school age.
My nephew is August born, bot deferred and never struggled.
I think it should be something to consider depending on the individual child rather than an automatic decision based purely on birthday.

www.gov.uk/government/publications/summer-born-children-school-admission/summer-born-children-starting-school-advice-for-parents

I think there has to be a cut off so someone is always going to be the youngest. Children reach compulsory school age after they turn 5 so it is fine to defer them for a year but if that happens then I think they should go into the correct age group i.e. year 1. The issue here isn’t the deferring it is that the school have elected to put those children into reception. It might make more sense to go back to staggering entry so the summer borns only do the last term of reception before moving into year 1 but I also understand why this is more difficult for the school to manage. I wonder where it stops though. Is the plan for deferred children to always be a year behind or at some point with there be a jump up/year missed.

How are parents who choose to delay trying to ‘swizz’ a legitimate system put in place by the government? Please do explain.

How do you feel about most other European countries starting children aged 6-7, NI children born in July/August having to opt in to start at 4 and Scotland having a minimum starting age of 4.5. Are these parents trying to swizz the system?

Funding for sixth form/college ends aged 19 by the way.

But the standard of being ready for school will shift if you keep changing the boundaries. If the age children begin school keeps being pushed back, the expectations of being “school ready” will be more demanding.

This. There are lots of schools and educational settings where kids do things in mixed age groups, and this is of massive benefit to the children involved if done right. There are many kids who are just naturally bigger than others. There is one child in year two of my child's school who is smaller than the smallest reception child, just how it turned out.
The issue is to deal with the behaviour, not try to make each class homogeneous by age/size of child.

Deferred children are supposed to join their actual cohort as far as I understand it - it’ll cause mayhem in secondary if not, where league tables are based on the % passing the exam who are eligible to take it - so deferred children who are kept back a year will count as a fail in their GCSE year for core subjects, and their results won’t even count the next year.

It’s not about being the youngest though. It’s about being ready for school.

I agree with you. However, I do have to also point out that my late July DS is the second biggest in his class, so the size thing is not always so simple. He really struggled at the beginning with the social side, and I did consider deferring him but had the same feeling as you that it wasn't necessarily the best option for everyone. He'd have been an absolute giant in the year below if I had!

April/May borns were clearly treated like July/August borns because funding ran by terms so April borns waited as long as August borns.

I agree completely. My daughters were days off of being September born (and were actually due in October). I don’t think deferring should be allowed. When does it stop? If all July and August babies defer then the May and June babies will be the youngest, so then they defer?

Someone has to be the youngest and in Reception and Year 1 sometimes that age gap really shows but it’s not a forever thing. My daughters are excelling in their “correct” year group far more than my November born baby is in his.

I agree with this entirely as long as that includes multiple births as well of course.

Like the Scottish system then? Children starting in P1 this August (we don't have Reception) will generally have been born between 1st March 2020 and 28th February 2021. Deferring children born January/February is common now and, in our area, sometimes November/December too. I don't know that people see it as "cheating" the system, more that their child may not be so ready for school.

At the other end of school, our exam system means some people have the required entry qualifications after 5th year (Y12). So, only 16 years old - although I don't know many who have taken up places at that age.

In USA where been a thing much longer some some demographics much more likely to defer kindergarten (wealthy/white) Not aware of any similar stats for uk yet.

It all depends on the child.

My dd is in reception, she’s August 28th and the youngest in her class by 4 months.

But she’s ahead in everything academically, and is soaring socially and emotionally. Her teacher said she forgets dd is so little sometimes, as you’d think she was one of the oldest.

On the other hand, my eldest was October born and struggled in reception.

Everyone thought we were mad for not deferring, especially as I don’t work so could have kept her at home or sent her to school nursery for a few hours, but she’s thriving, we knew she would because of her personality and who she is.

No it isn't unfair. You are choosing to send your child to school early before compulsory school age. What is unfair is the advantage given to winter-borns in education, sport, life opportunities. Thankfully there is now common sense that an only just 4 year old doesn't belong in school. More similarly aligned to European countries and elsewhere in the world.

I agree not all twins are the same.
From a simple size point of view one of mine was always the tallest ( and still is ) whilst the other the shortest.
From an academic point of view mine also didn’t suffer, in the end. The beginning of their school years was a nightmare though. They are now studying for degrees in neuroscience and film and television, so clearly in the long run they did well.
I was asking what OP would propose for twins though. From her point of view because not all are the same and twins, according to doctors and the science, are behind at birth and take many years to catch up ( if at all ).