Summer born babies - am I wrong?

[Sunflowermuma]

Hi all, I'm probably BU particularly as my friends plans don't actually have any impact on me but

I have 2DD D1 is 3 and May Born. DD2 is 6m July Born

My friend has 3 kids. DS aged 7Sept, DD 3Aug and DS 5mAug

Our two daughters are both due to start school in September at different schools, my friend told me this week how she is in contact with the school to have her daughter start Sept 2020 instead as she's summer born. I asked why as her daughter is already in nursery 5 days, has no health issues and certainly isn't behind on development. Her reasoning? She just doesn't want a child to be youngest in the year.

Her son is very bright and doing really well at school and she puts that down to his sept birthday.

I queried her and said someone has to be the youngest and surely if she doesn't have any developmental issues the school will just say no. She replied saying that she'll make something up as she'll do what she can to get her DD ahead. Again this made no sense to me as surely having another year at nursery won't be good for her and she may get picked on once the other kids realise? She got a bit snappy with me and told me to mind my own so I now feel bad for questioning her, I was polite and tbh just trying to understand her thinking

Do people really do this? I understand delaying for developmental reasons but just to make your child the oldest instead of youngest?

If my DS had been born just 8 hours later she would now be in Year 3 rather than year 4. We didn’t have the option to hold back a year to start in reception, she would have missed it and gone straight to Year 1. I felt this would be harder for her. She is also tiny for her age so looked like a toddler in a school uniform when she started. However, because her older sibling was at school, she was so eager to go and whilst there are differences in some things (she’s reading worst witch whilst friends are already on Harry Potter) she is a model student in her class and has been from day one. She just loves it and no teacher has ever had any concerns. She probably is younger with her play than some of the other girls but her 2 best friend are also summer babies, so it works well.

Yes, if you miss year Reception then you go in straight to Year 1 the next September. Yes, on average , autumn term babies fare better than August babies in primary school. They equal out in the end if there are no special needs issues.
Our eldest grandchild was eight in August. She is globally 2 years developementally behind her peers anyway, so 3 years effectively and is beginning now to be very aware of this.
We have just retired from teaching.
We were very, very lucky to have been able to plan our 3 daughters with September and October birthdays.

I completely understand many couples have problems and are just so thankful for their child no matter when it is born, as with our own 3 daughters and their husbands.

But again, statistically it doesn't level out. They are disadvantaged throughout their school career. And you don't have to miss reception, you just start it at 5 instead of 4.

Nope, you delay you delay. The child starts reception the September after they become 5.

Wish I had delayed Ds.

He is at college now and nearly 2 years younger than anyone else because they have moved him up a year.
Only now because he is doing something he loves is he top of the class.
He spent his whole education trailing at the bottom and feeling adrift from his peers.

@Ginpin2

Same - was just grateful to have two happy, pretty healthy children so their school start date didn't even enter my head until much later! Interestingly they were due in September but arrived earlier than expected - a feat never repeated since they were born!!!
Before 2015 you're right - if you decided not to send to yr R at 4 you had to go straight into Yr 1 but that's not the case anymore.
There was a big recent study called The Summerborn Effect whuch looked at millions of children over several years. The gap narrows as they get older but actually never goes away. I.e. summerborns never catch up

@moredoll - the funding continues until the last term before they turn 5

@oliversmumsarmy 😪

I think there’s far too much emphasis being put on summer babies. Any figures stated will be averaged out so some will do better, some worse. This is the same no matter when your child is born. There’s probably just not been as much research into, say March babies compared to sept babies. March babies I’m sure are also disadvantaged to sept babies but they just have to get on with it!! For goodness sake we are talking months!! It might make a bit of a difference early on at school but then it evens out - maybe if the kids keep hearing their parents saying to other parents or teachers or the child themselves how hard it is for their poor child being youngest the child actually just starts to take on the role of the lower achiever and subconsciously thinks that’s ok, coz im the youngest??!! It could be a self fulfilling prophecy which could put them on the back foot for life, giving an excuse for poor performance. It might give them a complex and make them feel less able. They won’t know they’re the youngest until their parents make such a big song and dance about it. It’s just life. I know plenty of mums with kids born in summer months whose kids are just fine. Maybe this is just people not wanting to accept their child isn’t bright or something?? Not all kids are. Maybe it’s that and nothing to do with when they were born. Maybe it’s the parents that are not ready rather than the kids.

@Angela712 - did you have confirmation that delayed children would sit the 11+ with the adopted cohort from the dfe or individual schools?

There are grammar schools around us who think delayed children should sit the 11+ in y5. I would be really interested to know if there's any way to challenge this if they have the same view when the time comes.

The primary we are applying to is LA controlled but all secondary schools are academies, so I'm not sure if the delay would be carried through school (even though I know they're supposed to show it's in a child's best interests).

@Angela712

Thank you, that's good to know.

One of DD's friends is August born and a very bright girl who seems not to have struggled with academics or the transition to reception or high school.

However she seems to have struggled at college with the whole adulting bit, apart from the annoyances of being the last to learn to drive or be allowed in a nightclub. When they all went backpacking last summer, DD said she was noticeably out of her depth. She is very sensibly having a year at home before she goes to uni.

So now they’re are being called ‘delayed children’ - howtomessup yourchild.com. How wonderful all these perfectly able slightly younger kids must feel knowing they are a “delayed child”.

So now they’re are being called ‘delayed children’ - howtomessup yourchild.com. How wonderful all these perfectly able slightly younger kids must feel knowing they are a “delayed child”.

A rose by any other name ... I prefer "summer born".
That website doesn't appear to exist so I'll stick with the detailed academic research, thanks.

They don’t get a big fat badge saying ‘delayed’. I think this is all rather like the plastic bag tax and the smoking ban. By the time England brought it in, Scotland were well used to it and it wasn’t an issue anymore. Sure, Scotland had the same knee-jerk reaction initially, but things quickly become what we accept as the norm, and actually end up agreeing with. Deferral in Scotland is far more common, and in Scotland a four year and one day child would never start school. The earliest starting age is 4 years 5 months, and nearly all of those children will defer for a year. They’re not labelled or teased for it, it’s the norm.

But they won't be seen as a 'delayed children' if there is a shift in mindset to the system being like that in Scotland, where there is a cut off date but also flexibility around that cut off date! It will become perfectly accepted that a child with a birthday in one of 5 months could be in either of 2 school cohorts. Whats the problem with that?

@sb74 do you understand how statistics work at all? That's exactly what they do take them all by birth month, add them up for Sept then fivide by the 100s of thousands they looked at. Repeat for October, november.

Summerborns never catch up.

Yes I do know all the stats because i soent a year researching everything - why not take a few minutes to start with the basics.

Out of interest why are you so passionately against the Govt backed system amd all of us trying to do what we see as the best thing for our children?

Ooh and if you could let me know how you are so sure all our children are perfectly able i would love to know

There’s plenty of research showing that people don’t like ‘labels’ and kids are not stupid they pick up on things they hear adults say. There are also plenty of psychology studies showing how people start to behave in a way that is expected of them. If kids have it drummed into them, even if inadvertently, that they are at a disadvantage due to when they were born and made to feel different then this could affect their behaviour and achievements thus affect their performance at school. Unfortunately there will never be a study to prove or disprove in this case as it wouldn’t be possible but it would be interesting to know how summer babies from families who just let them get on with things compare to those who make it a big deal if it etc etc.

@tubspreciousthings

It may differ in different areas - but the DfE confirmed (as did our local county council) that this is the case. The school fill in an "overage" form and they lose summer "weighting" i.e. they no longer get extra points to compensate for the fact that they are younger.

I just think the world has gone a bit mad to be honest. Kids nowadays, including mine, are mollycoddled beyond belief. This to me is yet just another example of it.

@sb74 i don't plan to make it a big deal, drum it into them or even mention it unkess they ask ... problem solved.

Question still unanswered - why are you so against it??

Angela- I haven’t looked into things- you’re right. It’s of no use to me to do so however I can have an opinion. I just don’t see how children without special circumstances benefit from being delayed. I don’t know if kids are able, of course I don’t but based on this thread seems plenty are.

Mollycoddled? Seriously 🤣

I'm letting them start school at 5 not 4 how is that mollycoddling?

AND WHY DO YOU CARE ???

-sb74 well if you spent 5 minutes looking it up instead of racjnvback here to criticise us for potentially "damaging" our children you would have an informed opiniom instead of just a "flat earth" opinion

Angela- kids should just be allowed to get on with things. And based on what I have said I do think there potentially could be environmental factors affecting younger kids performance not just coz they are two months younger than someone else. I think delaying kids should be the exception not as it now appears to be becoming the norm. And on another note, since when has the government known what it’s doing?

I’ll say what I think thank you. Not interested in looking things up in relation to this. It’s just my opinion. Yes it is mollycoddling to me.