Primary school admissions - MNHQ needs your thoughts!

I have to say that after returning to the UK I'm so shocked by the education system here. School undoubtably starts way too early and is incredibly inflexible. The summer born issue is clearly very significant, and cannot be denied looking at the statistics. It is also an issue that simply doesn't exist elsewhere in the world.

The delay that concerns me with my son is emotional maturity, he will become overwhelmed with a full day in a classroom, whether it's formal learning or not. He can behave well and concentrate but not for an entire day. He'll end up being disruptive and taking up a disproportionate amount of teacher time. The start of school is incredibly important as it is incredibly difficult to bring a child round to education if they had a rocky start. For that reason I won't start him until compulsory school age. But why should he then miss out on YR?

Exactly Tiggy. Those saying that their child should be able to start at 5 and have a full year of reception, well very few children can have that. A child born slap bang in the middle of year either starts school pre-5 (let's leave aside the whole 'term after 5' business, because that takes up a 5 month chunk of the year from spring to late August) or misses half of reception. There is no way of tinkering with the system to enable even the majority of children to have both those things (unless they skips bits of other years). It all becomes a question of degree.

tiggytape

It's worth remembering that even though the Code is law, it does not supersede primary legislation, and there is a case to be made here that the Code does not properly reflect primary legislation.

I would remind you that the both the 2009 and the 2010 School Admissions Codes contained incomplete and therefore inaccurate legal definitions of Reception class, which very likely exacerbated the already pervasive idea that all children should be in school, in Reception class, at the age of 4 – and certainly by the time they’ve turned 5. This is the definition provided:

“Defined by section 142 of the SSFA 1998. An entry class to primary schools for children who are aged 5 during the school year and for children who are younger than 5 who it is expedient to educate with them.”

Also look at the changes the DfE made to its Code in 2014:
summerbornchildren.org/2015/03/31/dfe-promised-flexibility-but-look-what-it-chose-to-change-in-the-code/

And the above changes in the context of a DfE that publicly declares 'the key thing is flexibility' and 'we want to empower parents':
summerbornchildren.org/2015/03/06/3-ministers-in-3-years-promise-us-flexibility-but-actions-speak-louder-than-words-what-will-nick-gibb-do-between-now-and-april-offer-day/

You may have confidence in the Code, and be satisfied that it works well when schools and councils can decide whether summer born children who start school at CSAge are forced to miss a year - at any point in their education - but I don't.

Look at this as an example of why the current system is so broken:
summerbornchildren.org/2015/03/26/kent-boy-forced-to-miss-year-of-school-with-devastating-consequences-and-unnecessary-sen/

Alberta in Canada has a flexible school starting age and regularly appears high up in international education league tables - and while I'm not suggesting that its success is 'because' of its admissions policy, it certainly demonstrates that its flexible admissions policy does not adversely affect pupils' outcomes. There is a fear of change by some in England, but the bottom line remains the same - our CSAge has been lowered by the back door for so long now that people think parents of summer born children are asking for something 'new' or 'special', and therefore it should be debated and challenged - when in fact what we're asking for is something we should have been entitled to for many decades. There would certainly have been significantly fewer cases of SEN diagnosis of summer born children, and therefore reduced costs for tax-payers...

Final point - where is the evidence that it is in ANY child's best interests to miss their critical and crucial foundation year of school and be forced to enter Year 1 instead? The DfE presented no such evidence to the Education Committee last year, and on the contrary, existing evidence shows that missing even part of a year of school is detrimental for children. The DfE's summer born policy is as unfounded as it is unfair, and I'm personally shocked at how many head teachers, council administrators and MPs are willing to accept a Code that means children can be forced to miss whole years of school as a direct result of their parents refusing to enrol them EARLY.

It isn't so very long ago that most schools didn't have reception classes, school began at year 1, which is why that year is year 1.

When I went to school, we all began in the school year AFTER we turned 5, not the school year after we turned 4. There were no reception classes. That was 1970s.

When I first started teaching, most schools still didn't have state funded pre-school education of any kind. My parents lived in Gloucestershire, no state funded pre-school. I started teaching in East End of London, there was state subsidized nursery, pre-school and reception classes. Why? well because the borough had realised they had a problem when so many kids arrived at school with such poor 'pre-school' skills. (eg had never held a crayon/done any drawing; had never had a story read to them; had very poor vocab and speech; had never held a knife and fork etc) Add to that the high number of kids coming in with no English and they opened pre-school classes.

So the problem we have with summer borns is a newish one of our own making. Because most summer borns are fine starting school age 5+ as opposed to 4+.

(but year 1 in 1970s included proper infant stuff like playing and painting, but that is a while other thread)

My lad had a January start. It was perfect for him. He was a little older, a little more confident having been a "big boy" for the last term of preschool. He went into year r a term late and thrived.

The current system is flawed in so many ways!
Why have children that have not reached CSA to start school? Why are there 4 years old sitting in classrooms?
Summerborns are discriminated against without being given a choice if start their children 1 year earlier or at CSA in reception.
A vast amount of summerborns are misdiagnosed as having SEN, which results in fewer resource being allocated to children that do have SEN or to the rest of the classroom.
This is a huge waste of money and a great injustice that starts at the very beginning of the process and that could easily be avoided by giving parents the rightful choice of deciding what is best for their own children.

I appreciate that Alice, not saying it shouldn't change at all, just responding to the posters suggesting school start between 5.5 and 6.5 for instance - from the perspective that that might be bad for the older ones. Maybe a 3 month shift I.e. Cut off date in June or possibly a choice (country wide!) for those born over the summer would work ok.

Fair and equal access...

tiggytape

It IS our absolute right to start our children in school at compulsory school age.

We don't however have the absolute right to request which year group our children enter, that's what many summerborn parents are campaigning for; hence the amount of comments on his thread regarding the unfair process we have to go through to get a reception start at CSAge. Some LA's are still saying NO to every request. Some admissions authorities are making different decisions on the SAME child. Some admissions authorities are asking for evidence some aren't. This is not clear, fair and objective. It's one rule for one and one rule for another and it must change.

I'd just like to point out Section 8 of the Education Act 1996 which states:

“A person begins to be of compulsory school age –

· when he attains the age of five, if he attains that age on a prescribed day, and

· otherwise at the beginning of the prescribed day next following his attaining that age.”

and also...
Reception class is defined by Section 142 of the School Standards and Framework Act 1998 as:

“a class in which education is provided which is suitable for children aged five and any children who are under or over five years old whom it is expedient to educate with pupils of that age.”

So...why should a child starting school at CSAge be forced to miss a year?!

Just to go back to the original question.

The system as it is does not allow for many things.
eg
1.You live 1 mile away from the school, but it is your closest school as you live MORE than 1 mile away from other schools. So you loose out on all schools.

1. sibling priority. This is a great thing, up to a point. But I think that if a family moves house out of a set 'catchment area' then they should not expect to keep their sibling priority. Siblings out of catchment shouldn't take priority over a child who lives in the same street as the school

1. If you were given a school miles away from home because all the schools were oversubscribed, then the least the LA could do is let you have a place for your sibling at that school
2. moving house. There really needs to be some flexibility in the system for people who move between Jan and Sept.
3. allocating 2 schools to one family. I really don't know how you would do this, but the stories of families being given 2 schools at opposite ends of town are rife, and that does not count in an appeal. The LA needs to take some responsibility for this.

I would love to return to a system where if you live in x area you are guaranteed a place at x school. I don't see why it wouldn't be possible to balance that with choice to go out of your area.

Walkingbkwrm

I am glad that your son has thrived in reception but there is a 5 month difference between an early April born and a late August born. This is a massive difference. My August born son has developed so much in the past 5 months but was certainly not ready at just turned 4. Many parents of summerborns just want the flexibility and choice for their child. :)

We have a summerborn boy and according to the the DfE we should be able to request he gets a reception start at compulsory school age yet our local education authority and schools under their influence in Birmingham don't fancy following the guidance so just say no!! The DfE should legislate to stop this postcode lottery and arbitrar decision making and make sure individual children's needs are actually catered for! The system is discriminatory against summerborns and the over subscription of schools desperately needs dealing with the whole thing is a shambles :-///

My Aug born son struggled with starting nursery at 3yrs 1 week. He stopped sleeping and eating. His whole world became about his intense anxiety about going to nursery and we had to remove him in the end. He restarted nursery at 4yr 1 week and after some anxiety at the beginning, he is now thriving. I believe this is because at just 4 years old he was ready for NURSERY (not school). Staff regularly comment that he's a different child this year.

My son was expected to start in reception at 4 and the head teacher of the school, which the nursery is part of, wanted to move him up into his 'correct' year group after one term of nursery. This would have been a disaster for my son.

We are very fortunate though because some weeks after meeting with the head teacher to discuss the situation, he contacted us to say he had changed his mind and would now support our application to the Local Education Authority for our son to start Reception at 5yrs 1 week (Compulsory School Age), rather than at 4yrs 1 week as would normally be expected.

I say we are fortunate because without the head teacher's support I'm not sure our application would have been successful. We had no statement, no 'professional' evidence to support our request, just a list of circumstances and experience which told us, as parents, that our son was not emotionally ready to start school at only just 4.

This is the very long way around to saying that parents of summer born children should be able to choose when their child starts reception. They should not be forced to send their children to school a year early. We have been very fortunate with our local head teacher but many others are not so lucky, to the detriment of their 4 year old sons and daughters who then must endure school, rather than enjoy it.

The professionals currently involved in these decisions may be superb at their jobs but they do not know our children. We do not make these decisions lightly. Trust parents to make this decision themselves and we will no longer have a situation where there are inconsistencies and unfairness, not just in different areas of the country, but between neighbouring schools as well.

Just to add a slightly different slant to things, I agree that more flexibility (and transparency and consistency) is key but I would NOT vote for the Canadian system. DS1 is April born and started reception this year and has thrived on the mix of structure and play in Reception, he has bloomed so much and didn't really enjoy Nursery at all - too random and free flow - and short, without the opportunity to do things like eat lunch with his friends. The thought that in Canada he wouldn't even start school until this Sept and then probably only half days for another year makes me feel greatful I live here! He had sports club this holiday and they wouldn't let him stay all day as he wasn't 5 yet, and he is so sad about it - he could have managed the whole day easily. Maybe just 4 is too young for some, they change so quickly but let's not swing too far the other way, please!

Flexibility is key here, forcing square pegs into round holes simply isn't working - it's obvious. Summer-borns are at a very real disadvantage when it comes to early education in England and there's plentiful research that proves this. I agree that summer-borns parents have had to get clued up - I knew nothing about education system a year ago, and am now in my 8th month of battling with local admissions to allow my child to start school at CSA. I am foreign myself and wouldn't consider myself particularly privileged but I do want my son to do his best in school. Doesn't everyone?

I agree that:

a) children here are forced into primary education way too young (research showing 6 or 7 is far more appropriate age to ensure children to benefit most and thrive in their school life). the reality is that most kids start at age 4 and spending resources in supporting these poor kids - summer born or not - clearly simply too young for formal learning is a poor way of dealing with a problem. it's like putting a plaster on a broken leg really.

b) there should be some real degree of flexibility when it comes to admissions and DOB should not be a determining factor (other countries - in fact, almost all other countries have managed this nicely so it baffles me as to why England can't)

c) all children should be entitled to 7 years primary education

d) parents wishes should be adhered to when it comes to deciding which year a child should be admitted to - nobody wants their child 'left behind' but parents know their kids best and for LA to ignore this, is madness.

My son was born in August 2011 (almost 4 weeks early) and is due to start Reception in September just 10 as after turning 4. I'm currently in he process of getting a delay agreed so that he can start Reception Class next year at Compulsory school age instead. Even though the admissions code states that this is possible for a summer born child aslong as it is in their best interests, my local authority seem set on trying their hardest to not let it happen. I'm finding it all very stressful and even if we are eventually successful, we could then possibly face having to lose a year of my sons education at some point in the future. Examples of this include when he starts secondary school or if we were to move to a different area etc It seems like it's a postcode lottery and the summer born guidance which was updated in Dec 2014 is so subjective that different local authorities are making up their own rules regarding it. I've had to have a meeting with the headteacher of our first choice school and will soon be presenting our case to the school governors, all before we even know if he'll be given a place at he school on offers day! If we're unsucxesful then our only other 'options' are either for him to start this year as a very young 4 year old who is definitely not ready for school or to wait until he's compulsory school age and have him forced to go straight into Year 1 and lose out on a year of his education. Totally unfair and illogical!

Am in Wales with a summer born prem who started reception aged 5. there is no guidance here and the council is not interested, leaving it to individual schools. Messy, not transparent and adds another layer of awkward.

Also, forgot to mention that it is very hard to get through to the LA via telephone and when you do, the operatives did not know the answers to any of my questions :(

I have successfully managed to obtain acceptance of my summer born son to start in reception at CSage. The LA were easy to deal with although did send a 'helpful' letter outlining the reasons why being educated out of his chronological year group could be damaging to him. They seemed to fail to see that if he was born 22 days later, there would be no issue at all!

I know that many LA's are not as easy to deal with regarding acceptance of summerborns into YR at CSAge....so I count myself and my son lucky.

However, being out of his 'chronological' year group meant that I could not apply for a schools place online as his DOB did not register with the online system...not helpful. So on 16th April, I will not find out about which school my son has got into via email. I will have to wait to get a letter. Fair application system for all....I think not! CSage is the LEGAL stating age of school and should therefore a parent exercising their right to send their child to school in the term following their 5th birthday should not be 'locked' out of the online application process.

Sirzy -totally agree re ks1.

I don't understand why the guidelines from the Dfe are being followed in some areas of the country for summer born children but not in others. It is grossly unfair. Researchers have shown that summer born children are at a significant disadvantage, which in turn leads to misdiagnosis of SEN which costs everyone money and has a detrimental effect on the children's education. This is not how it's done in other countries. The bureaucrats have been allowed to take over. What happened to 'every child matters'???

I haven't got the to the point of applying yet, but I am concerned about a couple of years in the future when we get there. My son was born on 30 August 2013, and I'm concerned about the effect that being so young compared to his peers, and starting formal schooling at barely four, might have on him and his experience of school.

While, currently, I can apply for him to delay a year (and so start school in reception at compulsory school age), there is no guarantee that this will be accepted and it is currently a real postcode lottery as to how accepting the LEA is of delaying entry by a year. Many LEAs try to force the child straight into year 1 instead of allowing them to have their full seven years of primary education.

I would just like to have the choice, so that when we get to the point of applying for schools we can look at where our son is at and assess whether we think he will be ready to start school mere days after he turns four, or whether he would benefit from waiting an extra year, until he actually reaches compulsory school age, to start reception.