Unfair to defer summer borns

Seriously? You are incapable of googling? The time it took you to write that you could have done so.

Is anyone actually allowed to defer a May/June born? SN excepted of course.
My Gds was born in late July, and dd did wonder whether to defer him, but nursery staff said he’d be fine, and he was - albeit a reluctant reader and writer for a while.

Would love you to link just one of these many studies ....

No, I don’t think it’s about ‘beating’ other children @Aussierose2. For most parents it’s just about trying to do the best for your own child, trying to make sure they don’t struggle or fall behind. Trying to set them up to do well and be happy.

Where we live it's slightly different but my youngest is the equivalent of a June baby but I've been told by one parent I should defer him so he can be the 'leader of the class' when he starts 🤮 We won't be doing that he's going to be in the year he should be in I'm not bothered about whether he's 'beating' the other kids but I'm pretty sure that's why alot of parents are doing it

@harrietm87

Except most schools won’t take them on the dot of 4.

The ECCE preschool scheme really determines when they start in Ireland. It’s not compulsory but the vast majority avail of it.

For example, a child born anytime in 2020 is eligible for preschool years in 23/24 and 24/25 and will then start school in Aug/Sept 25. So the range is typically 4 years 8 months to 5 years 8 months when starting school now.

I actually would say the problem presents its self more in key stage 1, especially year 1. The EYFS is much more about the whole child and is play based. The demands of ks1 are much more and often school require much more , I have seen many, particularly summer born boys really struggle with year 1.

EXACTLY this. They aren’t being held back, or losing a year, they are being given back the year their peers all took for granted.

My child’s Montessori teacher told us that if children are getting bored at their preschool it’s because of a problem with their setting. Our child’s nursery had materials to teach children up to age 7 as all children differ in interest and ability so they were more than adept at catering for our child in the same way they do for September borns who leave nursery at 5.

‘There are no studies’ is very different to ‘you have read no studies’. All you need to do is a quick google to show that there are….

It doesn’t seem to matter how many times people explain that it’s not about being the youngest; it’s about starting school too young, missing a year of early years that your peers automatically get if born a couple of days or weeks later.

Yes, agreed but the law permits children to start between 4 and 6 so, as I said, it is theoretically possible to have an almost 2 year age range in a class.

A much better system imo.

in Ireland, kids can start between 4 and 6, so there can be an almost 2 year age range

@harrietm87

Realistically though, no one starts a child at 4 now in Ireland. If they’ll turn 5 before Christmas they’ll probably start in Sept, though there’s a question mark over Nov/Dec kids these days as the starting age is going up.
In any case the age range is about a year, not two.

Indeed. What is the point of putting a child who is not ready for school in school? Do these people think it's a good use of the teacher's/TA's time to be managing unhappy, anxious little children who can't meet the academic or behavioural demands of school? Is it fair for a child to be set up for failure?

If that were true then any child could be deferred based on proven need irrespective of the month they were born in.

Maybe that should be the way it happens. That might benefit a great number of children.

If that were true then any child could be deferred based on proven need irrespective of the month they were born in. Also children that wouldn't benefit from being deferred and would actually thrive starting with their peers would not be allowed to defer. The system absolutely doesn't work like this and it is currently all determined by the desire of the parent.

It's not about "advantage". It's about delivering developmentally appropriate education to individual children.

I home educated my kids in the primary school years, apart from the youngest. So that's the perspective I come from. And the question of me is always "is this particular child ready and able to benefit from this educational program or curriculum?"

It would be crazy to me to take a child who is just not developmentally ready to learn to read, for example, and put them in a class where they were going to insist he learn to read, put him in special programs when all that is really necessary is a bit more time, or worse, use shortcuts to get him reading in a way that would be detrimental down the line. (Which, when I was working in a school as a literacy tutor, was something I saw a lot with 10 year old boys in particular.)

If schools aren't going to be flexible in their expectations for children at that age, then they need to accept that developmental readiness is important when they start. One of my children who was a very late talker and was still doing speech therapy would clearly not have been ready even though he was not young for year, he just needed more time to get his sounds down before starting reading. Other people have mentioned children not reliably toilet trained at 4, or I have known children still really needing a nap at that age - good sign they might not be ready for a full day at school.

Schools used to be a little less academically pushy in the first year or so. In fact where I live, kids were 6 months older when they began and it was only a half day. If we keep pushing expectations down for academic work there will be more children who aren't ready to meet those expectations.

Yup my DD has a huge advantage as deferred after she was born a month early on the last day of August. She was non verbal and not toilet trained when she should have started school and was on the SEN register at her nursery.
her advantage now is that she has caught up with her peers - which happen to be in the school year below.
I am so relieved that she was born after 2014 and there was some scope for flexibility.

The playing field is never equal or anywhere near it. Kids have vastly different abilities, rates of development, parental resources and support.

Not only is there nothing wrong with parents acting in what they believe is the best interests of their child (for whatever reasons they consider valid), but it is absolutely the right thing for them to do.

If you believe that deferring should not be possible, then you should direct your complaints to the government rather than to parents who take this route as they are perfectly entitled to do.

Trying to put aside the 'top of the class' nonsense, why can't this be about a summer born child simply having an extra year of being a little kid before they start school? Something that their September and October peers have been granted automatically.

I imagine that would be my first and overriding reason to defer - that very young 4 years olds are actually losing a whole year of their early childhood - they are in school everyday, and all that that entails - while children born just weeks later than them have a whole extra year to play, have naps, charge around all day, direct their own learning etc. Schooling comes soon enough, why not let them play if you are able to?

If it's because you think they'll be bored then surely your grievance is with the setting they're in, not the principle of delaying itself.

You can't have it all ways. If the argument is valid then why would you allow deferral and allow the disadvantage to be exacerbated for those who choose to stay with their peer group? If 25% additional life experience is too much then why is 33% better? There has to be a cut off somewhere so the youngest will always be detrimented. Even in a world where all summer borns defer than the February born children will be lacking life experience and the disadvantage will move to them.

No, the science simply doesn't back up your arguments. There are no studies that prove that summer born children that don't defer aren't disadvantaged by summer born children that do defer.

I should have said KS1 and Reception for clarity, but if you really had such experience of education you would know that teachers tend to either teach Reception- Y2 or Y3-Y6 and Reception and KS1 tend to be categorised together for a lot of activities.

I don't need to make an presumptions about your experience in the education sector as it's patently obvious from your posts that you have none.

I haven't made that assumption but in the same way that September born kids have been proven to have an advantage academically,

That’s interesting. I’m mid September born and started school on my 5th birthday, in year 1. I was always the youngest in the class.

I have made a successful career in academia.

Oh right so these issues only become apparent in KS1 and not in Reception then? Don't try to lecture me and presume my level of experience in the education sector.

Having a young or boy heavy class may be difficult but that doesn't mean that having a year with a large range of ages isn't difficult too. The concepts are not mutually exclusive.

You realise the arguments you are making are also the exact case FOR delaying a summer born’s start? As they are having to socialise and learn alongside children with 25% more life experience as them; which you appear to agree would set them at a disadvantage?

There is a difference between challenging someone who only uses anecdotes and hearsay from others to inform their opinion and narrow mindedness. Of course I am not ‘definitively right’, all children are different and none of us have a crystal ball; which is why parents are forced instead to rely on studies and statistics and their own assessment of their child’s needs to make a decision about school start. But you are asserting that older children in the class cause problems for younger children and I am asking you for the evidence to support this as it is directly counter to what the studies and research suggests. You appear comfortable with regurgitating opinions and anecdotes of others to inform yourself and don’t seem much up for reflecting on any challenge to this.

I'm talking about at Reception age quite obviously.