Summer born headache.

I’m a late summer baby and was fine at school. As were all the other late summer babies. The whole notion of ‘deferring’ is strange to me. It really wasn’t something people used to do unless their child had SEN.

It's strange too, if your child is average or above average all they are getting is a disadvantage. I'd rather mine could start school earlier not later!

The problem is that some parents are making the judgment that their children aren’t ready without any really knowledge of reception class and how it works. So children who would have been fine starting school in their correct cohort are given an advantage over their entire cohort, because they weren’t delayed or born so close to the cut off that it makes no difference.

By advantaging some children, you are a placing a disadvantage on others, especially those who were genuinely not able to start school at just turned 4 but their parents can’t afford to keep them in nursery for longer.

It means the class teacher has to teach to an even wider range of ability than is already present across a year group of children with different EY experiences. Schools will give children an extra year in reception if they really need it.

Everything about it is unfair unless it is restricted to children who are genuinely delayed developmentally and who are August born. All others should be catered for within their correct cohort and when deferral happens it should be because it is recommended by professionals not desired by anxious or ill informed parents.

But that won't be the case for OP. Even if all the delayed children are April-born which is highly unlikely, they'll only be a year older than him, well within the acceptable age range.

I think OP and others are missing the point of deferring. It's not about not wanting your child to be the youngest in the year or them compared to others or wanting to take away some 'disadvantage' of them vs other children etc - school isn't a competition! It's about that particular child not being ready to start school at just turned 4 - not 'compared to others', just thinking about them as an individual in the school system.

As a PP said, your child starting at 4.5 is very different from a child starting at just 4.

There'll always be a mix of maturity, ability etc within a class but all anyone needs to focus on is their own child, not their child compared to other kids.

I hear you. There will always be a year between kids on a class, but all this deferring means there can be almost 18 months. I think it should only be allowed in exceptional circumstances. I think sometimes parents defer for their own reasons, not for the good of the kid too.

Edited to delete message posted twice by accident.

We didn't have to make a separate request, and our summer born ds starts Y7 in September. Might have been different as he has an EHCP in place though.

Dd was born at similar gestation and is about to go into Y5. Our local schools are all mixed classes anyway (Y1/2 together, Y3/4 together, Y5/6 together) so dd has been in some ways affected more by the ability for summer borns to defer. She's held her own well enough so far, so try not to panic about effects of prematurity. I won't say it's all been plain sailing, but she's certainly not had any major struggles. I think it's probably the combination of natural worry plus knowledge of deferred children making you worry more than you need to.

This is what I was thinking - that it will make a two tier system - that those who can afford another year of nursery or another year of a parent at home will defer, and end up with a huge advantage over those who can’t afford this.

There’s also the OP’s point of the cut off becoming March, but in fact that’s what it is in Scotland (I think) and it seems to work well.
Just turned 4 is too young for many children, but 4.5 isn’t, even if they’re the youngest in the class.

Sats results and gcse and alevel all at national level decrease from sept to aug.

Part of that is likely that skills depend somewhat on each other so a child later to read or write affects other subjects.
Part of the issue is that we put so much weight on a child being brighter if they get higher gcse grades but actual intelligence may not be higher.
At 11+ even with the score adjustments more sept at taken in.

Many countries allow children to drop back a year. Overall its pointless pushing a child through for them to then fail maths or eng.
I would move to a more stabke exam system where tests are more similar to past papers and if a higher number do well then they all pass.

Somewhat its to balance out the rather crap state school system. My dd was bright but not pushed at all really all primary cared about was meeting expectations in fact pretended in reception that it was only met despite reading chaoter books.

Secondary even more shocking. We've had hardly any engkish homework. Theres a lesson for reading... They set tests and put the wrong date. Dont let kids with extra time have extra time then use resukts to set them.

Gcse maths is more like my as level. However the foundation paper could probably be passed by y6 kids.

Sorry, attainment results for who? And say otherwise to what? That he'll be fine?

Oh yes of course. I was talking about August babies who may already have additional disadvantages such as disengaged parents being further disadvantaged by the system. I wasn’t suggesting all parents who don’t defer are uninterested or uninformed.

This just illustrates that every child is different. My DS same in respect of timings. We did defer and even in a deferred year EYFS was very much not his friend as a premmie. Physical milestones were always our problem as he was so tiny. But give him a book and he'd read it from 3 onward

Very interesting to read how this has changed since our DS was in school. We had to apply to defer and present as many reports and documents as we could. Being from a different system - as we were returning from a spell working in the US - held more weight than being a premmie baby.

However, once we were in we didn't have to reset for secondary. The only difference was that we couldn't apply on the automatic system. It had to be a 'paper' application online and we were notified 3 days later than everyone else by both email and letter regarding his secondary place. They were an awful 3 days as there are 3 local secondaries and some didn't get their first choice.

It was very much the right thing for our DS. In terms of physical readiness he was actually still the smallest boy and the last to zip up his coat etc. He was wearing age 2 clothes at 5. But his epic catch up was great to watch. He's a 19 year old 6ft 1" now.

Ive got a prem late summer born who would have had an october birthday if born at due date.

Did not defer

Absolutely fine. Reception is still EYFS and more like what would be deemed nursery in other countries.

Or they are aware, can afford it but still feel their child is ready? Dont have to be disengaged to not defer your child.

I think people who are simply doing it to try and give their child an advantage are so selfish.

I wouldn’t worry about secondary either. The drop in birth rates mean there are loads of places around.

All deferring does is shifting the problem to those born in March, and for parents who don’t understand about summer born deferral. PP has already linked to a US study of this.

That said, if I have a June to August baby now, I would absolutely hold them back for a year. Maybe too for an April or May child. I will absolutely pay for all the advantages I can get. Don’t blame those parents at all.

You are misinformed. Schools do try to say no, but government guidance on this is very clear and there are avenues parents can follow to overturn a "No". The school needs to demonstrate why it would be in the individual child's best interests to miss a year of their education, which is difficult to do. Socially, emotionally, academically... how could it ever be in a child's best interests to be forced to skip a year of education? Would the school you are a governor at allow a child to take an entire year off school? I highly doubt it.

Some schools don't like it, because it is "different" but that doesn't mean they can just blindly say no. They need to follow the admissions code and associated guidance.

Attainment results, broken down by birth month, (particularly for boys but girls also), would say otherwise.

Somebody has to be the youngest. Your DC will be fine, there's lots of support and differentiation so he'll catch up to where he should be

Well, it was just my experience with a particular group. And yes, all the children are also tutored. Home ed has become very popular as well in the area I used to live in in London, especially for the first couple of years of primary.

My children are tutored now we have moved here, but that’s down to the schools here. Not the teaching, but there is a lot of dire behaviour, so the poor teachers spend a lot of time fire fighting when they should be teaching.

My children have done the 11 + here as well. We are 30/40 mins from the grammars in Birmingham, but no one in this area does it. My middle child has just left year 6 and she was the first one to do the 11+ at her school for as long as they could remember (my son is an adult now so we were in a London for his secondary education). I don’t know why more people here don’t try for it.

My youngest August born will also do it when her time comes, the test here is weighted for age, so she won’t be at any disadvantage.

You could only do this from around 2014/2015 intake.
obviously there has also been large curriculum change.
obviousky if the parents are really clever it would make less difference.
but sats and gcses and alevels are scaled and clearly show the resluts go down but birth month.
at dd1 school sats results are still being used within setting at y9.

Once you are in top sets less likely to move down. Those moving up will have missed work.

I don’t see this as a class thing but I suppose it depends on the people involved. I went to school relatively recently as I’m in my 20s. I grew up in an affluent area to educated parents who are medical professionals.

Affluent families gained an upper hand in the form of tutoring, the upper hand wasn’t in deferring entry to primary school. Instead they paid for their kids to be privately tutored, prepped them for grammar or private schools, put them in extra curricular activities and ensured their kids got their homework etc done. No children deferred a year.

Many people of higher social status went to university themselves and have navigated the education system themselves. It’s going to be more natural for them to want their children to follow the standard education system as opposed to deferring a year, cause they/their families are familiar with the educational system. If that has majorly changed in the last decade, I would be shocked as being successful at a younger age is generally celebrated. Therefore I don’t think not deferring entry is a poverty or working class trait.